root-ids changing for some merges

[Matthew D. Fuller]

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 07:30:41PM -0400 I heard the voice of
Aaron Bentley, and lo! it spake thus:
> 
> I felt that since there's a tie to break (a tree can't have two
> roots), it made a lot of sense to break the tie in favour of OTHER,
> since that's how merge usually breaks ties.
> 
> You clearly prefer the old behaviour, so I'd like to know why.

For me, that's always wrong, because I use -r0..-1 merges all the time
to bring in shared bits of code.  I pretty well always want to discard
OTHER's root wholesale, and just take [usually not even all of] the
files.

Generally, the case is a little special because it's difficult to
refer to the root to tell it to change things around/back...


-- 
Matthew Fuller     (MF4839)   |  fullermd at over-yonder.net
Systems/Network Administrator |  http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/
           On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.