Fixing rebase rather than avoiding it

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org>
> Cc: Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es>,
>     bazaar at lists.canonical.com
> Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:19:07 +0900
> 
>  > IMO, advising those who didn't to switch to ``saner practices'' is a
>  > better path than telling them to use "bzr rebase".  The result will be
>  > the same, but with much less potential for confusion and errors.
> 
> Not obvious.  If you get a merge conflict

Text (a.k.a. contents) conflicts only, right?  You cannot get any
conflicts with revision ancestry in a bound branch, right?

If so, I believe that it is still safer for newbies, because text
conflicts is something everybody is familiar with.

> ISTM that the main advantage to this is that it's a familiar
> workflow to those with CVS experience.

Yes.  And that's exactly the point (at least my point), speaking about
new converts.