Looks fine. I haven't thought in detail about whether conflict
resolution is symmetric like this but it seems reasonable.
> + null $ conflictedPaths $ patchsetConflictResolutions $
Using "conflictedPaths" as the indicator of "are there any conflicts"
seems standard in other places in the code, but it does feel a bit
ugly. It doesn't seem intrinsic that a conflict has to be associated
with some path, though it's no doubt true right now, at least if
we ignore the already-broken setpref patches.
|