On Apr 20, 5:04 pm, "Edward K. Ream" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I learned from experience (i.e., the hard way) that merging A into B > is *not* the same as merging B into A. Unless there are conflicts, > merging A into B replaces B's code with A's code. On second thought, this statement, if it is true at all, probably only applies to criss-cross merges. Indeed, each line comes from a rev, so presumably lines from later revs replace lines from earlier revs, except for conflicts, or in cases such as criss-cross merges in which there is no clear ordering between revs. I'm hoping that the merger of the sax-graph branch into the trunk will be straightforward (not a criss-cross). If so, there should be fewer possibilities for reversions. The only way to know for sure will be careful study of all diffs. That study will pay off, I suspect... Edward --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
