[darcs-users] Fwd: Towards a conflict-free revision control system.

[Eric Kow]

I hope to read your explanation of weights later (looks helpful!)

> Ok, I do not understand the details, but I don't think it matters very
> much in the end: the fact that the applicability of a patch depends on
> the context will necessarily introduce some sort of a search. The
> problem boils down to this: let's say you have 'n' patches in your
> repository, that potentially conflict with each other. Can they be
> applied in an order that produces no conflict (or least conflicts)?

This is why I still have the slight feeling of crossed wires, i.e. that
we would understand each other perfectly were it not for a little
detail.

In darcs, given two patches with the same context, whether or not
patches conflict with each other is completely independent of the order
in which you apply them.  As far as I understand darcs, if you can
merge one way way without conflicts, you surely can merge the other way
as well.  Am I looking at this in too narrow a way?  For example, maybe
the notion of patch context is irrelevant to your view?

Anyway, maybe this will be clearer to me as I read your explanation of
weights.

Thanks!

-- 
Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow>
PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20090202/529d6349/attachment.pgp