From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: some bzrmerge.el questions Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 23:30:42 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1e7he81r9l.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <24mxn3cr6e.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1295152258 4342 80.91.229.12 (16 Jan 2011 04:30:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 04:30:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 16 05:30:54 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PeKGT-0005Uh-CG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 05:30:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58861 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PeKGP-0007nc-Vs for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2011 23:30:49 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=52913 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PeKGK-0007nV-H9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2011 23:30:45 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PeKGJ-0003JX-Ey for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2011 23:30:44 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183]:4986 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PeKGJ-0003JR-A6; Sat, 15 Jan 2011 23:30:43 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAI4DMk1FxKhC/2dsb2JhbACkaHS9AIVQBIRwjjY X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,328,1291611600"; d="scan'208";a="88191471" Original-Received: from 69-196-168-66.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.196.168.66]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 15 Jan 2011 23:30:42 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 3C48859099; Sat, 15 Jan 2011 23:30:42 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Glenn Morris's message of "Sat, 15 Jan 2011 15:44:34 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:134590 Archived-At: >> BTW, I also committed a change to smerge, which I used to automate >> most of the conflict resolution (there was tons of spurious >> conflicts with the copyright year update, as you must know, and most >> of them could be resolved automatically). > Well, that would certainly make anyone who resolved them all by hand > look foolish... Well, it's when I started to feel foolish that I dediced to bite the bullet and write the code in the first place. > Could you add a similar thing for changes in comments that only relate > to loaddef checksums? I think in such cases, it should not bother > merging the change. I might do just that next time I bump into such conflicts, but the problem is that those are specific to Emacs code so I expect it'll take more coding to figure out where to put that code. Stefan