[darcs-users] Yet another conflict resolution idea.

[Petr Rockai]

Hello,

"Eric Kow" <eric.kow at gmail.com> writes:
> This reminds me of an idea that David was working on in the very early
> phases of darcs2 (and Jason's Summer of Code project).
(for reference, Eric sent me this link privately a little later:
http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-devel/2006-July/004510.html)

The big difference probably is (if I understand everything correctly), that the
above "dead patches" work was set in the context of theory of patches and the
"resolutions" were required to have "nice" commutation properties (and I
believe those depended on commutation properties of patch inverses, which
turned out to be problematic).

So what I had in mind is probably related to the above dead patches spec, but
the intention was to "liberate" the resolutions from the rather stringent
requirements of "being a patch" (inside patch theory). [A rather bold intent
could be to build some sort of "theory of conflicts" working in terms of patch
sets, that would however live somewhat above and a little to the left (or to
the right?) of theory of patches.]

Yours,
   Petr.

-- 
Peter Rockai | me()mornfall!net | prockai()redhat!com
 http://blog.mornfall.net | http://web.mornfall.net

"In My Egotistical Opinion, most people's C programs should be
 indented six feet downward and covered with dirt."
     -- Blair P. Houghton on the subject of C program indentation