Re: Marginal features

On Sat, 7 May 2005, David Roundy wrote:

> > [renaming the root]
>
> I've thought about this (and even talked about it), but it never seemed
> like it would be worth implementing.  Darcs always stores filenames with a
> preceding ./ partly so we could perhaps later "rename" the root to be
> something like subproject/, but I never could convince myself that this
> would actually be useful.

How else would you build a repo that merges two subrepos and can still
pull new patches from each easily?

> > [convergence - merging identical patches]
>
> This is a common complaint about darcs, and is a tough problem.  I think
> the best solution is to *not* treat the patches as having identical
> identities, but in the conflict resolution to recognize what the user has
> tried to do and suggest a default "trivial" resolution.  I'd like to have a
> distinction in a future darcs between "unresolved conflicts" and "resolved
> conflicts".  The latter would be actual conflicts, but ones for which darcs
> was able to suggest a reasonable resolution.  Thus "identical" patches
> would fall into the latter category.  It'd still be a conflict and would
> require a resolution patch, but the user would get a nice message like "We
> were able to resolve 5 conflicts in foo.cpp, please record if this is
> satisfactory."

If we had two independent repos A and B that converged on the same tree
into C, and then there were future patches in say A, could they be
pulled into C without causing further conflicts?

Cheers,

Ganesh