On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Roan Kattouw roan.kattouw@home.nl wrote:
Tell me about it. I spent quite a lot of time being annoyed at merge conflicts in the apiedit branch (and later the ApiEdit_Vodafone branch), but that was mostly because I didn't run the merge often enough (only like once a month).
Nothing will magically prevent merge conflicts, but my understanding is that RVCSes tend to be better at helping you solve them. git rebase, for instance, will start with the updated trunk, then apply each of *your* patches (probably a lot fewer than the patches applied to trunk since your branch!) one by one. When it hits a conflict, it will let you manually apply that specific patch of yours (or drop it from the patch set, if you like) before proceeding with the rest of your patches.
I don't know if git merge is similar, since I haven't used it much, and I haven't maintained any branches in SVN or Mercurial. But everyone seems to say that RVCSes are way better at this.
That would be a good argument for moving to another VCS; branches would also be less cumbersome.
Yes, that's one of their key advantages. There are plenty of others as well, of course.