[PATCH 2 of 3] mergetools.hgrc: disable vimdiff as a valid proposal for default mergetools

Laurens Holst laurens.nospam at grauw.nl
Tue Aug 21 05:04:13 CDT 2012

Op 21-08-12 11:42, Martin Geisler schreef:
>>> And as mentioned above: There are different opinions on whether <<<
>>> === >>> markers are pretty ok. Not having the ancestor revision makes
>>> it harder than necessary to resolve correctly.
>> I agree that the current internalmerge marker are suboptimal. But It
>> does not seems hard to improve it. I use a version that create:
>>      <<< local
>>      This is the local version
>>      ==== base
>>      This is the common ancestor version
>>      ==== other
>>      This is the merge target version
>>      >>>
> Personally, I find anything more than "local and other" markers very
> annoying when we talk about textual markers. If I get markers in my file
> I want to be able to look at each conflict and delete the version I
> don't like -- a binary choice. I find it too much if there are three
> regions and I have to compare A with B and A with C and delete
> everything but one region.

In my experience having a base version (as well as revision numbers so I 
can do manual investigation in the log) is absolutely necessary for 
doing an informed merge for anything but the most basic of conflicts.


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list