[darcs-users] Conflict marking

Richard A. Smith rsmith at bitworks-inc.com
Wed Oct 5 03:09:36 UTC 2005


Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

> You're asking why darcs doesn't label the text that came from the
> local copy versus the text that came from the pulled patch, right?  I

Yes.

> of the code_.  This is especially true for darcs where it is very
> common to pull patches "out of order" (at least in my use case).  This
> means that the most recently pulled patch is very likely not the
> current version!
> 
> Looking at the issue more deeply, I don't know of any SCM that
> identifies _any_ of the _patches_ involved in a conflict.  Eg, CVS and
> RCS know nothing about patches, so they can't even identify the

Right thats what I meant.  Versions rather than patches.  I was just 
trying to put it in darcs terms.

I understand the issues you are talking about.  I guess what I really 
want to know is which one of the hunks matches what I have in my working 
directory and which of the hunks is from what patch.  I don't see how 
order matters.

When merging patches from other peoples repos its information thats 
really useful.  Last week I was pulling in some patches in the master 
repo and a had a confict.  I knew that I had changed the file in 
questions and that my copy was the best one to use.

So when I went to look at the file I found myself unable to remember 
exactly what it was that I had done that made my version better.  Both 
versions looked plauseable.  So I needed to go look at what was 
previously in my working directory to know what was in there.  But I 
can't since my working dir is now modified.

My options then were to do some sort of unpull or revert to get back to 
the orginal. Look at it and remember what it looks like and then re-do 
the pull and select the right hunk.

In this case I had another copy in a branch and I was able to look at it 
and jog my memory.

Just seems like a big PITA.  I mean at the time of conflict don't you 
know what patch the conflicting changes are coming from?

I still don't understand how you can apply a patch to a file yet not 
know the source of the patch.

Mercurial seems to handle this.  From the wiki I see that on a conflict 
it opens your working copy and the copy of the pull in a merge tool.
I've not used mercurial though so I can't realy vouch that its exactly 
the same.

-- 
Richard A. Smith
Bitworks, Inc





More information about the darcs-users mailing list