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: Incorrect merge Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 09:51:35 -0400 Message-ID: References: <4CCEC526.3070502@cornell.edu> <87aaltc9rc.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <83pqup53qb.fsf@gnu.org> <83fwvk6arf.fsf@gnu.org> <87hbg0jxyu.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87d3qnk9am.fsf@telefonica.net> <87k4kvwu6w.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <8762wfk5r0.fsf@telefonica.net> <87eib3wp4j.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87fwvjimg2.fsf@telefonica.net> <87d3qnwk0v.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87wrovh2vl.fsf@telefonica.net> <871v73c775.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87oca6hpld.fsf@telefonica.net> <87zktqj1fw.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1288792310 25353 80.91.229.12 (3 Nov 2010 13:51:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 13:51:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 03 14:51:45 2010 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 1PDdkf-00019G-9o for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 14:51:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42710 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PDdke-0006tN-PS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 09:51:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55515 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PDdkY-0006t3-V7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 09:51:39 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PDdkX-0000xA-Nf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 09:51:38 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:51463 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PDdkX-0000x1-K1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 09:51:37 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqsKABsG0UzO+LrP/2dsb2JhbACgYIEDcr4VhUYEki0 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.58,289,1286164800"; d="scan'208";a="81469919" Original-Received: from 206-248-186-207.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([206.248.186.207]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 03 Nov 2010 09:51:36 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 2EEC2A8626; Wed, 3 Nov 2010 09:51:36 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87zktqj1fw.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (Stephen J. Turnbull's message of "Wed, 03 Nov 2010 16:44:51 +0900") 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:132324 Archived-At: > I don't know about others, but you don't need to prove to me that your > approach works. Although I haven't actually used it in practice, the > theory looks good enough. The question I have is whether it's well- > adapted to Emacs. Exactly. And even more so if you consider our use of ChangeLog files: Not only do I want a "merge script" in any case to help me resolve those spurious conflicts, so making this script look for commits with a "don't merge" flag and reverse apply their diffs before committing the merge is just a natural extension (in the sense that, just like for resolving conflicts in ChangeLog, all it does is automatize what we do manually). But on top of that, until we have a "merge script" I'd rather not add yet more branches to merge, since merging from emacs-common to emacs-23 will be yet another merge where I'll need to manually fix the ChangeLog conflicts. Of course, your argument will be that once we have a good "merge script" to resolve ChangeLog conflicts (or once we get rid of the ChangeLog files), we can use an emacs-common branch without suffering when merging from it into emacs-23. It's not like your point is not valid, but I don't think the difference matters nearly as much as this thread makes it out to be. Stefan