On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 01:34:37PM +0200, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> Can't we improve this? (not talking about emergency fixing 1.8.x, but
> thinking longer term). Can't we put the incoming edits "somewhere", so
> the user can do something useful (manually) with them? Perhaps put
> them in the moved-file with conflict markers around them, like we do
> for text conflicts?
I believe that in the future we'll just update the moved-away files
by default, without even asking the user. This way, the edit shows
up in the moved-away file, just as it does now if the user chooses
'mine-conflict' at the prompt.
To do that properly, we need better conflict resolution APIs that we
don't have in 1.8 yet. Right now, the API does not communicate to
consumers which of the available options trigger an automatic resolution
and which don't. I'd rather avoid the situation where API users start
making assumptions about the effects a particular conflict choice will
have. I'd rather communicate a 'automatic resolution' choice to clients
at the API level.
Received on 2013-06-12 13:57:44 CEST