Switch to weave merge?

[Aaron Bentley]

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

Aaron Bentley wrote:
> John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> 
>>>We decided that in post 0.8 we would switch to Patience diff so that we
>>>can give it a workout, and shakedown before we release 0.9. Do we want
>>>to switch to having weave merge be the default format for the same reason?
> 
> 
> Actually, I think we should switch to knit merge as the default.
> 
> What do I mean?
> 
> Bzr's weave merge requires operations that cannot be cheaply performed
> on a knit.  Specifically, it needs to know about deleted lines.
> 
> Knit merge, on the other hand, can be performed at decent speeds on a
> weave, or anything else with cheap annotation.
> 
> Right now, the type of merge you get depends on the type of repository
> you use, and I think that's bad, because they do have different outcomes
> in some cases. Weave is being phased out anyway, so I think we should
> make knit merge the default everywhere.
> 
> 
>>>My understanding for weave merge is that it succeeds in a lot of places
>>>'merge3' would fail, but when it fails it has a harder time recovering.
>>>(Or at least we humans don't understand the failure as well).
> 
> 
> The conflicts can be a little odd for these merge types, yes.  And we
> don't emit the 'BASE' text, because while we do still pick a base, it's
> only used for filesystem merging, not text merging.

Oh, one thing: only merge3 currently supports cherrypicking, though we
know how to add support to the other types.

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

iD8DBQFEdgmf0F+nu1YWqI0RAtKwAJ9VFUGL4+e7nZvezhzvaLMLzr/FxQCdHcGK
vY1UxJNhWShyNXHJxS45+dk=
=RLAe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----