Issue 2708 an idea to improve mark-conflicts

Title an idea to improve mark-conflicts
Priority feature Status resolved
Milestone Resolved in 2.18.1
Superseder Nosy List bfrk
Assigned To

Created on 2023-07-04.19:17:26 by bfrk, last changed 2024-02-18.16:27:31 by noreply.

msg23492 (view) Author: bfrk Date: 2023-07-04.19:17:25
The help for `darcs mark-conflicts` says that if you have unrecorded changes, 
then they will become lost and that darcs will prompt before overwriting them.

I was wondering: this could be easily avoided simply by regarding unrecorded 
changes as potential conflict resolutions "under construction". In other 
words: we calculate the markup under the /assumption/ that unrecorded changes 
are eventually recorded. Technically, this simply means that we include the 
(temporary) named patch that contains the unrecorded changes when calling 
resolveConflicts. That should make it impossible for markup created by mark-
conflicts to conflict with unrecorded changes.
msg23723 (view) Author: bfrk Date: 2023-09-05.12:32:37
see patch2355
msg23738 (view) Author: noreply Date: 2024-02-18.16:27:30
The following patch sent by Ben Franksen <ben.franksen@online.de> updated issue issue2708 with

Hash: e574b9dffb0002906570ed49e319ffea75d6bd16
Author: Ben Franksen <ben.franksen@online.de>
* resolve issue2708: regard unrecorded changes as potential conflict resolutions
Date User Action Args
2023-07-04 19:17:26bfrkcreate
2023-07-04 19:17:35bfrksetpriority: feature
2023-09-05 12:32:38bfrksetstatus: unknown -> has-patch
messages: + msg23723
2024-02-18 16:27:31noreplysetstatus: has-patch -> resolved
messages: + msg23738
resolvedin: 2.18.1