Re: Expected Behavior?

Dear diary, on Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 12:43:04AM CET, I got a letter
where Martin Langhoff [off-list ref] said that...

On 11/10/05, Petr Baudis [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

what mechanism are you talking about?

I suspect you haven't seen the git-merge mechanism in action -- or
perhaps I'm a bit lost and we're talking about different things. At
least last time I merged with git-merge.sh, it tried several
strategies in order in a temporary index. Actually, it tried in order:
stupid, resolve, recursive... It shortcuts if one merges cleanly, but
it'll definitely work through them. It's very nice to see this in
action.

But that's something different that I'm talking about. :-)

As I said, I'm talking about per-file automergers. git-merge-one-file
and that stuff. I know about merge strategies and they are cool.

The mergers and things like git-merge-base are probably the areas of
git that need the most focus and polish -- that's why I'm
uncomfortable with cg-merge doing its own thing, as it gets a lot less
review than git-merge-XX resolvers.

Yes. My longer plan is to use the strategy resolvers as well, but my
TODO list is big... And I don't perceive this as a critical thing (the
standard strategy seems to work well enough), although I would like to
see this before 1.0.

Right now I am seeing some slightly abnormal things (*) in how some
our our merges are going, so I' ll have to roll up my sleeves at some
point and try and figure out what's going on. And as I look into
cg-merge and cg-Xmergefile, not many eyes have been through it...

At least this is the one area of Cogito that has at least a bit
reasonable automated testing suite. ;-)

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
VI has two modes: the one in which it beeps and the one in which
it doesn't.