On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 3:55 AM, Randall Leeds <[email protected]> wrote: > I think you miss the point that was made above about mirrors, still, > unless I misunderstand. B may have other changes interleaves with > those received from A, whether from interactive updates or other > replications, making its hashes different. Of course. But that's not a problem, because we save all the A's changeset hashes that we've seen during the replication. B's resulting hash would be different, but we don't care about it.
Also, since merging is commutative and associative we can reorder changesets in any way, so interleaving changes in itself should be OK.
