> On 23 May 2019, at 09:31, Simon Urli <simon.u...@xwiki.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 23/05/2019 09:22, Vincent Massol wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>> On 23 May 2019, at 09:14, Simon Urli <simon.u...@xwiki.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Vincent, all,
>>>
>>> On 22/05/2019 11:03, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>>> Hi Simon,
>>>>> On 22 May 2019, at 10:45, Simon Urli <simon.u...@xwiki.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm working on the merge on save for the roadmap of 11.5 and I need some
>>>>> decision to be taken.
>>>>>
>>>>> The main idea of the merge on save, is to try to merge users work in case
>>>>> of save conflict. Knowing that the merge might led to merge conflict in
>>>>> case of edits on the same places. Those merge conflict can be tackled
>>>>> automatically, but a priority will be then given to one version over
>>>>> another.
>>>>>
>>>>> I first propose to add an option in user profile, so users would have the
>>>>> possibility to choose between:
>>>>> 1. Always merge automatically the work, even in case of merge conflict
>>>> I don’t understand this part. If there’s a conflict it means it cannot be
>>>> merged… So would it do? Take latest version and overwrite previous version?
>>>
>>> We have an automatic fallback in case of conflict, for which we can choose
>>> the strategy: use current, previous or next version. By default the
>>> strategy is to take the current version.
>>> So the merge is never stucked in case of conflict, by default it returns
>>> the current version.
>> That’s really a bad idea IMO. By definition, a conflict is … a conflict…
>> there’s no way to merge that automatically or it’s not a conflict…. If you
>> do, then you have data loss. Which is not acceptable (it’s the worse thing
>> that can happen and exactly what we’re trying to avoid with this feature!
>> ;)). The user has to be presented the conflict and needs to be asked what he
>> wants to loose: his data or the data from the last person who saved. And
>> give him a solution to store his content so that he can merge it manually
>> line by line later on (save his content on another special page, in memory
>> (risky), etc).
>
> I'm just stating about the current implementation of the document merge here.
> It's just how it works right now. And if you use the version the user is
> trying to save as the fallback strategy (which was what we discussed for
> option 1), you'd never get a data loss: all versions would be stored in
> revisions.
From a technical point you’re right. However, this is exactly the situation we
had before you started implementing the conflict window: the last user who
saves overwrite any previous changes that happened after he started editing.
And if you remember Ludovic raised this problem since he had users who
complained to him about “data loss”. From their POV, the content saved by the
user who got overwritten was lost.
Anyway, we agree that option 1 is not great so we’re good :)
Thanks
-Vincent
>
> Now I agree with you that option 1 is not a good idea, as I said in my first
> mail I'm afraid that the user would feel the same as before the warning
> conflict window.
>
> Simon
>> And in the next version, we’ll need to ask him this but line by line so that
>> it’s not all or nothing.
>> Do you agree?
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>>> 2. Always merge automatically, but ask what to do in case of merge
>>>>> conflict
>>>>> 3. Always ask what to do in case of save conflict
>>>>>
>>>>> Now the question is: what should be the default option?
>>>> Certainly not 1! 2 is really the best to me.
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
>>>>> Option 1 looks like a good fit for decreasing the number of clicks to do,
>>>>> but I'm a bit afraid that in case of conflict they would have the same
>>>>> feeling as before the warning conflict window: i.e. to loose some part of
>>>>> their work.
>>>>>
>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>
>>>>> Simon
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Simon Urli
>>>>> Software Engineer at XWiki SAS
>>>>> simon.u...@xwiki.com
>>>>> More about us at http://www.xwiki.com
>>>
>>> --
>>> Simon Urli
>>> Software Engineer at XWiki SAS
>>> simon.u...@xwiki.com
>>> More about us at http://www.xwiki.com
>
> --
> Simon Urli
> Software Engineer at XWiki SAS
> simon.u...@xwiki.com
> More about us at http://www.xwiki.com
