On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 09:32:03AM +1000, Brian Collins wrote:
> OK, so, if on the branch the change had looked like this:
> Line 2 on the branch
> Line 2A
>
> and on the trunk it had looked like this:
> Line 2 on the trunk
> Line 2A
>
> then adding "Line 3" on the branch after "Line 2A" would *not* have resulted in
> a conflict?
Correct, except that CVS might require more than one identical
line in between (eg. 2B, 2C, and 2D) to be confident that it had
put "Line 3" in the right place.
Of course, the problem would still be lurking; a year from now,
someone would end up making a change too close to "Line 2", and
would trip across it.
The Right Thing(TM) would probably be to collapse (ie. "merge and
forget") the branch and start a new one, rather than doing
multiple merges from the existing one -- but I'm not quite sure
how to do this in a context of ongoing bug-fixes to the previous
release.
The expedient thing, if the "Line 2 on the trunk" changes are
fairly localized, might be to check them in on the branch, so
that there's no longer a disagreement.
--
| | /\
|-_|/ > Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| | /
[Microsoft's] www.hotmail.com is running Apache/1.3.6 (Unix) ... on FreeBSD
- Netcraft's "What's that site running?" service, 12-Jun-2000
