root-ids changing for some merges

[vila]

>>>>> Aaron Bentley <aaron at aaronbentley.com> writes:

    > On 11-07-05 12:38 PM, vila wrote:
    >> The drawback that I just realized is that it breaks 'merge -r0..nn
    >> ../unrelated-branch' by forcing the new root which in turn trigger a
    >> rename for all existing children of the old root

    > That is the expected behaviour.

It wasn't the behaviour *before* your patch, the root-id was preserved
and the existing files in THIS weren't renamed.

    > Could you explain why that is a drawback?

Seeing all the files present in the branch before the merge being
renamed to the same name is quite surprising.

May be my test case is wrong and falsely alarming, yet, it passed on 2.2
and 2.3 but fails on trunk. Did you look at it ?

        Vincent