Hi, Merging from one of your archives, I got a patch which is a merge from mine, with in addition a (minor) manual edition.
I just want to insist on the fact that with our new kind of decentralized develoment, with one main archive and a star-shaped patch flow, it may be _crucial_ to avoid this kind of changesets: Some merge operators (replay) have a "--skip-present" option that can be used to automatically skip patches that are merge from the version from which I'm merging. If I use this option, the manual edition is just lost. In some contexts, merging a patch which is an old merge from me could raise conflicts. In this case, I may just say "Oh, this patch is a merge from me. I'll just sync-tree it and won't actually merge it". In this case also, the manual edition is lost. So, it's not just a question of keeping the history clean. It's a question of loosing code. I'm opening a feature-request on how to identify such changesets from xtla. -- Matthieu
