[PATCH V2] merge: Add support for 'union' merge strategy

[Augie Fackler]

> On Jul 11, 2015, at 5:53 AM, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> The idea for this merge strategy has been taken from Git.
> 
> This looks ok, but it's a bit much going on in one patch by our
> standards. Could I get you to split it up into the following pieces:
> 
> - bits that add start/end_marker (but please, no _ in new names)
> - bits that union option to simplemerge
> - bits that split out filemerge helper function
> - bits that add union merge + test of same
> 
> Ok. I can split it up that way, no problem. Just verifying before diving in: are you expecting it as a set of patches ('1 of 4'...)? Each with the same commit text as I provided above? Or are you expecting the last patch with the commit text as above, and the others with a shorter description like "In preparation of implementing union merge, rearrange ....”?

The latter - each commit message should describe what that commit is doing.

> 
>> 
>> Also, we may want the start/end marker business to be fully internal to
>> simplemerge rather than passing in more args.
> 
> Consider it done! :-)
> 
> I'm a bit spotty on time availability, but I'll get to resubmitting the patches; hopefully without too much delay.
> 
> Thanks for the prompt response!
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20150711/f58ded93/attachment.pgp>