On 22 June 2011 23:10, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Perhaps the "non-applicable" could be streamlined. >>>> I.e., "keep current version" = not applicable. >>>> >>> yes, could be.. >>> but that logic are only for conflics.. and i didn't wanted to mess >>> with it because its a lot more work. >> >> btw, Stephane, this is a good topic for dealing with it on friday, if >> you don't have anything else in mind. > > ok > did you run MC tests? > I htink that we should invest more in running tests. >
well, the changes i made are not intrusive, i mean it will work as before unless user plays with this flag using UI. So, MC will behave exactly as before and there is no problem from that side. > > >>> Because strangely , instead of using field to indicate a conflict (in >>> MCPatchOperation record) it does something strange and overly >>> complicated >>> (MCConflict). >>> >>> So, then each entry could contain >>> 'isApplicable' >>> and >>> 'isConflicting' >>> >>> and once user resolves the conflict, the isConflicting should be set to >>> false, >>> while isApplicable are uniformly to indicate which version to use >>> (current or incoming one), when merging. >>> >>> >>>> No need for the extra menu item then. >>>> >>>> Regards, Gary >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Igor Stasenko" <[email protected]> >>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 3:40 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Merge tool. No way to cherry pick the changes? >>>> >>>> >>>>> Here the code >>>>> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4439 >>>>> >>>>> please tell me if it works for you. >>>>> I tested on simple merge and it works fine (the changes which i marked >>>>> as not applicable are not loaded). >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >> > > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
