On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Roan Kattouw <roan.kattouw(a)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
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.