On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 5:41 PM, bch <brad.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > I tried this, and I see what you're talking about -- It's not clear to > me it's an error (I'm not apologizing for anything that happened here, > but I'd have to better understand the merge algorithm to know if this > is logically sane). Its easy to see how this could be confusing > though. I'll have to fiddle more to understand this. >
Understood. It is arguable in my mind that either the #endif should be in both of the baseline and merge portions, or that it should be present once after the merge conflict block. To not show it anywhere around the merge conflict though seems wrong. I'm also looking / debugging, trying to puzzle it out. I've created another repository that just has that one function from that one file in a similar trunk/branch configuration, and the same behavior is still present. Will keep looking. -- Scott Robison
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
