With GIT you can merge at a commit level (IE. you don't have to merge a whole branch at once). Can you do this with Mercurial? That way you can do it in steps rather than all at once.
V/R, William On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Dirk Bächle <[email protected]> wrote: > Russel, > > On 19.12.2015 14:31, Russel Winder wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I tried an experimental merge and much of the stuff looks like it will >> go straight through. However there is a lot of 3-way meld resolution to >> be done, hours of it, possibly days. Clearly there is no problem the >> human taking breaks as long as the computer doesn't. But what if… >> >> Has anyone any experience of checkpointing and restarting big Mercurial >> merge resolutions? >> >> > not with Mercurial so far, but here's what I tend to do at work > (Clearcase) when things get complicated: > > For every conflicting file I'll accept the "new" changes completely, > overwriting old stuff. This is just to get the basic "merge" operation > through. > Afterwards, I look at the single "diffs" and do the actual merge work by > trying to amend those places where some of the "old" stuff is still needed. > Note how you can list the "to be resolved" files with > > hg resolve -la > > Hope this helps you further, you may want to combine the "amend" work with > using the MQ extension... > > Regards, > > Dirk > > _______________________________________________ > Scons-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev >
_______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
