Painful user experience with 'hg resolve'

Isaac Jurado diptongo at gmail.com
Thu Aug 25 15:54:39 CDT 2011


On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Greg Ward <greg at gerg.ca> wrote:
>
> Recap: "hg resolve" does four things:
>  1) purely informative, no side effects: "resolve -l"
>  2) changes state, but reversible so not very dangerous: "resolve -m"
>  3) changes state, also reversible, even less dangerous: "resolve -u"
>  4) discards the user's current resolutions, non-reversible,
> dangerous: "resolve"
>
> (I think "resolve -m" is a touch more dangerous because it lets you
> commit, whereas "resolve -u" blocks committing.) Is it any wonder
> people get confused by "hg resolve"?

Fortunately, I don't have to use the "resolve" command that often.  But
when I have to, I read the help about three times in a row each time I
want to execute, in order to make sure which option is the one I need.

In general, I try to resolve conflicts right away at merge time (with a
merge tool) so I can avoid using "resolve" almost always.

However, I don't thing that adding a new command would help to solve the
situation; as the average developer does not care or has no interest in
understanding a DVCS workflow.  At least, that is my experience.

Cheers.

-- 
Isaac Jurado

"The noblest pleasure is the joy of understanding"
Leonardo da Vinci


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list