On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 10:29:08AM +1000, William Uther wrote:
> / \
> / \
> i a
> | |
> j b
> | |
> k c
> \ /
> \ /
> d
>
> With this setup, if anyone commits a child of k and then tries to
> merge, then they'll end up with the merge doing strange things.
> Files that existed in X should merge ok. (They'll do a a three
> way merge with k as the ancestor - that should be close enough.)
> Files that didn't exist in X will have been introduced separately
> in each side of the DAG and how they merge depends upon how d was
> generated. If d deleted the new nodes introduced in ijk then the
> new merge will warn about lost data, but will lose changes to those
> nodes.
Maybe
>
> X
> / \
> / \
> i |
> | |
> j |
> | |
> k |
| |
j |
| |
i |
| |
X |
\ /
\ /
a
|
b
|
c
|
> d
>
_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
