> The merge algorithm does *not* consider cherry-picks. It looks for > the most recent common ancestor without taking cherry-picks into > account.
Another popular version control tool whose name I won't mention (hint: rhymes with "zit") behaves identically to fossil in this scenario. Is there some deeper reason for not using the cherry pick "arrow", or is it simply that yall haven't had a need to improve the behavior here yet so haven't bothered? > On the other hand, the merge algorithm will usually recognize when the > same edit is applied twice, and do the right thing. > -- > D. Richard Hipp > [email protected] > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
