On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 19:20:32 -0500, John Arbash Meinel <[email protected]> wrote: > So you preserve the content of exactly D or E, you just generate a new > node in the graph to supersede the other one, correct?
Yes. > Say D is the 'winner', then you end up with a patch that reverts > everything in E. Yes, except that D should in fact contain all the changes of E, so it's not like we are completely backing them out, but that's how it appears in the revision graph. > In the below graph, the content in H == D, so when generating I, we > should see D as the common base, and I would then == F (because H - D == > NULL, so there is nothing to apply to F to generate I) Yes. > Going further with the above example, it really depends on what you > want. From what you've stated about "whichever one wins", then you sort > of simplify what you want. You explicitly stated that you are rejecting > any of the 2.1 changes that weren't in 3.0. I'm having a bit of a hard > time figuring out what you are trying to preserve in G, versus just > telling it "and now you are F/I". We want to preserve any changes vs. E. G has some packaging changes v.s. E, at least a Debian directory, and we want to preserve them, conflicting where the other side has made incompatible changes. That's again rather simplifying things though. > Probably. Examples can certainly shed light on confusing points. If you grab r44 of lp:ubuntu/lucid/brltty and r14 of lp:debian/sid/brltty then you can merge-package them to see an instance of this issue. Thanks, James -- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
