On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Barry Warsaw <[email protected]> wrote: > On Feb 04, 2011, at 11:00 AM, John Arbash Meinel wrote: > >> 1) 3-way merge the loom names, to get the proposed stack of looms. In >> this case you'll end up with: >> >> patch-3 >> patch-2 >> patch-1b >> patch-1 >> upstream >> >> 3-way merge is used so that you can handle people removing >> threads, different names for the bottom thread, etc. > > So you'd always end up with the union of thread names from both the source and > target looms? I guess that means that thread names could be resurrected if
No, you have a basis loom as well, deletes will be handled. But if a deleted thread was altered, a conflict needs to be issued. > say they were removed in the target. Perhaps you could delete them again if > the merge resulted in no differences between the deleted thread and the thread > underneath, in the merged branch. Theres a bug open to recommend that when up-thread encounters it, as a separate thing. -Rob -- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
