What we did at UBZ

[Jan Hudec]

On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 11:43:09 -0600, John A Meinel wrote:
> Aaron Bentley wrote:
> > Jan Hudec wrote:
> > |>If it's a merge, you won't be able to pull.
> > |
> > |
> > | So please make it so that I will. It's OK if it requires an option to
> > pull
> > | (though I still don't see a reason why it should not be the default),
> > | but --overwrite is clobbers too much.
> > 
> > What we're doing right now when you pull after being merged is "pull
> > convergence", which we were talking about eliminating.  Are you saying
> > you want to keep things the way they are, or that you want to do
> > something different when you pull after a merge?
> 
> I believe he is saying that he wants pull convergence to turn into
> "switch". So that if pull would converge, it just does a switch to the
> latest revision in other. Which would rewrite the local revision-history
> (if it exists).

Exactly. I think that loosing pull convergence completely would be a pity and
defining "pull" as "it will turn target into exact replica of source iff all
changes in target are present in source" sounds logical to me (always
expected it to work that way, actually).

-- 
						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb at ucw.cz>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20051120/26d580d4/attachment.pgp