Hi Greg, I just looked at sanity.sh (it's kind of scary when you mistake the test cases for code -- it looks like the obfuscated C competition on steroids!) and the CVS code itself, and there's a fair bit of disruption needed to get it a command-line parameter to the RCS_Merge command. i think i'll just take your suggestion, and patch our server with the -AT and be done with it. Thanks for the info about the no duplication, that means then that conflict markers will work well for both multi-developer-style merges and update-from-bugfix merges. I'll need to let the guys know here how the new system works but this will sure save me some headaches I can assure you!
Many thanks, Matthew -----Original Message----- From: Greg A. Woods [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, 23 June 2002 03:31 To: Matthew Herrmann Cc: CVS Mailing List Subject: Re: new feature suggestion: 3-way conflict indicators [ On Saturday, June 22, 2002 at 13:51:15 (+1000), Matthew Herrmann wrote: ] > Subject: Re: new feature suggestion: 3-way conflict indicators > > but, if i were to include this as a new argument to cvs update as an > argument (-3 i quite like), it wouldn't affect sanity.sh at all, since those > scripts would run exactly as before I think the only proper way to display merge conflicts is with '-AT'. I think '-E' is bogus and misleading in almost all cases. (Note that '-A' doesn't show unnecessary duplication -- it only shows old and new if that's all that's necessary.) ... _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
