Re: [fossil-users] merge after cherrypick plus edit does not identify GCA as I would like

2015-09-15 Thread Steve Stefanovich
as is can still point someone‎ in the right direction.) From: Eric Rubin-Smith‎ Sent: Tuesday, 15 September 2015 01:38 To: Fossil SCM user's discussion Reply To: Fossil SCM user's discussion Subject: [fossil-users] merge after cherrypick plus edit does not identify GCA as I would like See

Re: [fossil-users] merge after cherrypick plus edit does not identify GCA as I would like

2015-09-15 Thread Eric Rubin-Smith
> The merge algorithm does *not* consider cherry-picks. It looks for > the most recent common ancestor without taking cherry-picks into > account. Another popular version control tool whose name I won't mention (hint: rhymes with "zit") behaves identically to fossil in this scenario. Is there

Re: [fossil-users] merge after cherrypick plus edit does not identify GCA as I would like

2015-09-15 Thread Richard Hipp
On 9/15/15, Eric Rubin-Smith wrote: > >> The merge algorithm does *not* consider cherry-picks. It looks for >> the most recent common ancestor without taking cherry-picks into >> account. > > Another popular version control tool whose name I won't mention (hint: > rhymes with

Re: [fossil-users] merge after cherrypick plus edit does not identify GCA as I would like

2015-09-15 Thread Scott Doctor
a sideways question on this topic. Assume in my C editor I run the code formatter operation which indents and parses certain tokens for cosmetic, but not functional, changes in the file. By parsing I mean operations such as adding/removing linefeeds before/after a token such as a bracket or

Re: [fossil-users] merge after cherrypick plus edit does not identify GCA as I would like

2015-09-15 Thread Richard Hipp
On 9/14/15, Eric Rubin-Smith wrote: > See the transcript below for gory details. The summary is: > > 1. create a new file on trunk and check it in. > 2. edit the file and check in on a branch (let's call it "beta") > 3. trunk decides it wants that particular change set from

Re: [fossil-users] merge after cherrypick plus edit does not identify GCA as I would like

2015-09-15 Thread Eric Rubin-Smith
> Merge is done by a classic 3-way diff. It looks at all the changes > that occurred on the path from A to B and applies those same changes > to C. (A in this case would be the most recent common ancestor of B > and C). > > How would cherry-picks factor into this? > Sorry, maybe I'm confused.

Re: [fossil-users] merge after cherrypick plus edit does not identify GCA as I would like

2015-09-15 Thread Stephan Beal
Fossil knows nothing about syntax of any sort, so a merge must consider any change as significant. Try reindenting a python script, where whitespace is part of the syntax. Diff can be told to ignore changes in spacing, iirc. If you switch from unix EOL to Windows EOL fossil will see the whole file

[fossil-users] merge after cherrypick plus edit does not identify GCA as I would like

2015-09-14 Thread Eric Rubin-Smith
See the transcript below for gory details. The summary is: 1. create a new file on trunk and check it in. 2. edit the file and check in on a branch (let's call it "beta") 3. trunk decides it wants that particular change set from step (2), so cherrypick it (assume in this example that other stuff