Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.
At 28/12/2004 05:25, you wrote: >Gabriel Genellina wrote: > > > I want that any time a merge is needed, it's marked as a conflict. > > I don't want any automatic merges, no matter how trivial they would > > be; I want all merges resolved by the developers. > >That's how it should be anyway. > >Are you aware that merging is a pure client-side operation? The changes >produced by the merge have to be explicitly committed before they get >incorporated into the repository. Now take that and the fact that no >single file should ever be committed without prior review regardless of >how it came into committable state. But how do I know what happened during the update that triggered the merge? I need to review *these* changes. >And if you're just out for eye-candy, that's already there. If you do a >status on your files or view them in a GUI frontend like WinCvs there >will be a clear note saying "Result of merge". Forcing a conflict >status if there is none is just additional and unnecessary sugar on top >of that IMO. Ok, then I know that updating merged some changes, but *what* changes? Diff wont work, that would mark the differences between sandbox and repository (that is, *my* changes), but I need the differences between sandbox and (the revision which was originally checked out), that is, other people's changes. The steps outlined by Glenn appears to be a good solution to this.