[darcs-users] darcs patch: Resolve issue1588: make--dont-allow-conflicts filter ...
kowey at darcs.net
Sun Oct 4 21:23:21 UTC 2009
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 13:33:38 +0100, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:
> However it's not completely obvious to me that --skip-conflicts really
> is mutually exclusive with --don't-allow-conflicts. In particular, with
> --don't-allow-conflicts but not --skip-conflicts, you'll get offered
> every patch and then get a failure if any conflict. So if we accept your
> argument, and you have --skip-conflicts as a default and then you
> specify --don't-allow-conflicts on the command line, then suddenly
> you'll get conflicting patches offered to you. My general feeling is
> that --skip-conflicts may not be that useful as a default, and the more
> likely use cases are for the user to specify --mark-conflicts or
> --don't-allow-conflicts in the defaults file, and then to override that
> on the command line with --skip-conflicts.
It sounds fairly reasonable to me to expect that people generally are
not going to put --skip-conflicts in their defaults, and also to treat
conflict choice as orthogonal to conflict resolution. --mark-conflicts
and friends would have no effect when --skip-conflicts is around, but
those not seem like a problem since --skip-conflicts is stronger anyway.
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
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the darcs-users