[Gnu-arch-users] Re: in-tree pristines fatally wounded (merge-fest etc)

[Miles Bader]

Robert Collins <address@hidden> writes:
> > BTW, note that sometimes you may ideally also want `reunification'
> > following the redo step, if you're using tla update to merge from
> > another branch [something I often do]; in that case their can be quite
> > a few files that are considered `locally modified'.
> 
> Uhm, why? If you are merging against another branch, surely replay or
> star-merge are better options?

Update works better than replay because because of how it works when
there are conflicts (which are not uncommon), and because the way in
which update chooses which patches to apply is more convenient (like
replay --new, but I don't have to remember to use the option).

As for star-merge I don't know (I haven't tried it), but star-merge
usually seems not to work very well unless you happen to be following
the `mutual back and forth merging' model that the tutorial recommends.
In particular the branches I'm talking about are typically merged
_mostly_ only in one direction (with occasional changesets going in the
opposite direction).

In any case, `update' seems to do the job perfectly, so why _not_ use it?

-Miles
-- 
.Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.