On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 07:22:28PM +0200, Andreas Krey wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 18:13:09 +0000, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> ...
> > But I don't think subversion should enforce one particular merge outcome.
> > My opinion is that the user should be given a choice, and be supported
> > by an interactive conflict resolution prompt that shows all possible
> > resolution strategies:
> > - put all files in the same directory ("Markus Schaber's strategy")
> > - rename the local directory
> > - rename the incoming directory
> > - delete the local directory, replace with incoming directory
> > - discard the incoming directory, keep the local directory
> > - discard both directories
>
> Actually I think these are better handled by throwing away the merge
> results and doing the renames/removes on the respective branches, then
> redo the merge.
The above is only for "add vs. add" situations.
Scenarios involving renames are different.
> I tend to feel uneasy in these interactive conflict resolutions.
What makes you feel uneasy about it?
Note that, ideally, this menu could be recalled offline, after the
merge/update has completed with all conflicts postponed.
So you'd have all the time in the world to figure out your answer,
if that's what worrying you.
