On 19/10/12 21:48, Richard Hipp wrote: [...] > It tells you about the conflict when you do the "update" or "merge". > That's the only warning you have. > > Do you think we should enhance Fossil to keep track of conflicts and > issue warnings if you try commit with unresolved conflicts?
Definitely. It never even occurred to me that Fossil wouldn't already do this --- I believe all the other major VCSes do (although I've never had to deal with conflicts on git so don't know the workflow there). Now I know, of course, I'll pay more attention to the messages I get from "update", but even so I'm sure it's just a matter of time until I check in a conflicted file. (I would be interested to know if people have actually done this.) Apart from anything else, an explicit "resolve" step could also automatically clean up the extra files created as part of the conflict. A fairly trivial issue, but dealing with conflicts is irritating at the best of times and every little helps... -- ┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ───── http://www.cowlark.com ───── │ "Of course, on a sufficiently small planet, 40 km/hr is, in fact, │ sufficient to punt the elastic spherical cow into low orbit." --- │ Brooks Moses on r.a.sf.c
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
