[PATCH] test: merge fails since f153af9580fe

Peter Arrenbrecht peter.arrenbrecht at gmail.com
Sat Nov 14 01:42:26 CST 2009


On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Peter Arrenbrecht
<peter.arrenbrecht at gmail.com> wrote:
> Matt, thanks for the detailed analysis. This scenario is actually a
> simplified view of situations that arise when pbranch needs to do
> octopus merges at the branch level (simulated by repeated two-parent
> merges into a hidden branch - branch d in the script I sent). I have
> since realized that to automate such merges properly, I shall probably
> have to add dedicated conflict resolution anyway. So I'm fine with
> this change of behaviour.
[snip]
> (For the curious: pbranch conflict resolution should use the knowledge
> that it's doing an octopus merge. The example above used to work
> because only one of the branches being octopus-merged had a conflict.
> If both have one, then you cannot avoid the conflicts just by ordering
> the merges judiciously.)

Here's the octopus merge plan:

http://bitbucket.org/parren/hg-pbranch/issue/37/need-to-resolve-same-conflict-repeatedly#comment-76146

-parren


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list