On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 07:28:59AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote: > On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Lluís Batlle i Rossell > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > I don't see why most VCS tend (somehow propose) to *not commit* merge > > conflicts before solving the conflicts. That makes the conflict solution > > 'disappear' from the timeline. > > > > One reason: Having non-working code in the tree makes doing a bisect very > difficult.
Ah, good one. Maybe then the code doing diffs on a bisect could be clever enough to understand a merge conflict. _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
