On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 20:24 -0400, Richard Lowe wrote:
> Both new heads come from the remote (repo1), but it still refuses to
> choose which to update the working copy to, and suggests I merge.
>
> Also 'tip' is the most recent of the two heads, so 'hg up tip' isn't
> always what's going to be desired, either.
We've been discussing changing the way we handle named branches
recently, because the current scheme we use for managing named branches
within a repo is not very useful.
At the moment, branch naming is symmetric. If you have a branch named
foo and a branch named bar, and you merge the two, you end up with a
change that has both the foo and bar names. However, in many cases, you
want the merge to be asymmetric, i.e. the merge of foo and bar should
keep the names foo and bar separate.
The same thing applies to updating after a pull. Sometimes you want the
latest change in the repository, others you want the most recent change
that's on the same branch as you're on.
This is all by way of saying that the current behaviour of Mercurial is
known to be not entirely satisfactory in these cases; it is open to
change, and input would be welcome, especially if you have concrete
scenarios you want to see supported.
<b
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
