Re: Disallowing commits in presence of conflict markers

[Noel L Yap]

>> It's a requirement of any version control system to accept and faithfully
>> reproduce (identically) any version of any file placed under its control.
>> It cannot choose what it likes to accept.
>
>Hmmmm... I wonder why most of them offer keyword expansion then....

Isn't the usual advice not to use keyword expansion?

>CVS doesn't make any promises about non-text files.  I don't see any
>difference here with its refusal to allow a commit of what to it can
>only be unresolved merge conflicts.  CVS will still faithrully reproduce
>any file it allows to be committed.

"it allows to be committed" is a new requirement that is completely unnecessary
in a VC tool.  Any VC tool should allow any file to be committed as is.

>It would be you, the user, who would have to modify your precious file,
>not CVS.  CVS would still reproduce it identically (it just wouldn't let
>you initially commit anything that would appear to contain unresolved
>conflicts in the first case).

Please keep this patch out of the main distribution.

Noel



This communication is for informational purposes only.  It is not intended as
an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument
or as an official confirmation of any transaction. All market prices, data
and other information are not warranted as to completeness or accuracy and
are subject to change without notice. Any comments or statements made herein
do not necessarily reflect those of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., its
subsidiaries and affiliates.