On Apr 30, 2016, at 6:55 PM, Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org> wrote: > On 4/30/16, Steve Schow <st...@bstage.com> wrote: >> >> So in some ways this seems that when update is called in this “non-standard” >> way, its a bit more like a “merge”. > > (1) This way isn't "non-standard". It is the usual use-case for "update”.
wait now I’m confused. I assumed the “standard” way is fossil update without any version specified, which looks for the newest leaf from where we currently are checked out from. By non-standard, and I didn’t mean anything judgmental by that, I just meant trying to run update with a VERSION that isn’t even on the same branch…but I must not be understanding the command still….since it sounds like you are saying its the normal desirable thing to specify some other ancestor VERSION or version from another branch?…I hope you’re saying that this is in order to merge another branch into this one…within the repo. Yes? its not clear to me how I can create a merged branch somewhere that has all of the tentative changes….in the repo…that can be reviewed remotely….before commiting to the trunk. Sounds to me like its not possible currently with fossil. What exactly is the difference between merge and update? _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
