Strategies for push/merge problem?

[Peter Arrenbrecht]

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 6:50 PM, Paul Crowley <paul at lshift.net> wrote:
> Matt Mackall wrote:
>> Doing merging on the server is not a good idea. Setting aside all the
>> security and resource usage and complexity issues, it means that the
>> resulting commit is not something anyone has ever even seen, let alone
>> tested. And now it's in your history permanently. Who's name goes on
>> that commit?
>
> If there were special circumstances that warranted it, it would be easy
> to add an extension that does it; just put it on a hook at push time.

I don't think it's that easy. You'd want to be able to recover from
merges that do fail, etc. And you'd likely not want to lock the repo
for readers while doing the stuff. Not easy from a hook directly on
the central repo. And you'd also want to communicate back to the user
the result of the merge in the same operation to make things real
easy.
-parren