Terminology for referring to branches during merges and conflicts

[Barry Warsaw]

On Jan 15, 2010, at 02:31 PM, Michael Gliwinski wrote:

>On Friday 15 January 2010 02:20:56 Ben Finney wrote:
>> If the nicks aren't guaranteed unique, I think it would be a mistake to
>> try to use them for distinguishing branches in a comparison or for
>> filename suffixes.
>
>I don't think they should be used in place of THIS/BASE/OTHER for suffixes, 
>but as Andrew suggested, they would be helpful (in addition to 
>THIS/BASE/OTHER) as part of conflict markers in text conflicts.  In cases 
>they are different, they could basically mean you don't have to do that 
>mental mapping yourself (i.e. what is 'OTHER', etc.)

I have to be honest, no matter how many times I work out THIS/BASE/OTHER it
never sticks in my head.  Conflict resolution is actually rare enough (for me)
that the current terminology as presented to the user is always confusing.

-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20100115/c0da3d1b/attachment.pgp