Changesets and multiple ancestors

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi all,

I think treating merged revisions as ancestors makes changesets an
inferior way to merge.

Changesets represent a single revision.  When you merge them, there's no
sure way to get their ancestry.  Which means that you wind up with
incomplete ancestry in your branch.

We could have changesets represent multiple revisions, but that would
reduce their readability.

Or we could say that it's fine to lack some ancestry in a branch, but
that would still mean merging from branches was superior to merging from
changesets.

So I don't see any easy answer.  Just food for thought.

Aaron

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCwTk90F+nu1YWqI0RAh0WAJ9j/374lN2WyCsQSPibXy3UzXz1nwCfQVMY
I2QeOHPsIhWiFqUy2R1vFXc=
=R140
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----