[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Results of egrep -l '^<<<<<<< |^=======$|^>>>>>>> |^\|\|\|\|\ |\|\|

From: Noel L Yap
Subject: Re: Results of egrep -l '^<<<<<<< |^=======$|^>>>>>>> |^\|\|\|\|\ |\|\| '
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 16:06:11 -0400

>[ On Tuesday, July 24, 2001 at 14:27:07 (-0400), Noel L Yap wrote: ]
>> Subject: Re: Results of egrep -l '^<<<<<<< |^=======$|^>>>>>>> |^\|\|\|\|\
|\|\| '
>> If you go by popular demand, you're the one thinking backwards here, Greg.
>> Since there's no way for CVS to discern  the vendor's
>> conflict mark-up from its own, it shouldn't force any conventions on the
>How backwards your logic is, Noel.  "Popular demand" often (mostly?) has
>nothing to do with reality.  You can't change the reality of what CVS is
>and how it works (at least not without going to great lengths).  If I
>didn't know any better I'd think you're just trying every trick in the
>debating book to try and win this idiotic point.

Let's not start a philosophical discussion on what "reality" is.

I had thought that we already agrred that you will keep your "correct" version
of CVS (and name it NCVS) and we would keep our "incorrect" version.

>Obviously, just like I've said from the very very very beginning of this
>discussion, CVS must not allow unresolved conflicts.  Since it has no
>possible way to discern who caused a conflict, and nor can it tell a
>real conflict from a faked one either, it must therefore simply refuse
>to allow any commit of anything that even resembles the remnants of an
>unresolved conflict.  In other words you, the user, must resolve and/or
>clear all conflicts or constructs that look like conflicts, before CVS
>will permit you to continue a commit operation.

I think the rest of the world fully understands your POV and disagrees with it.

>Earlier, before you apparently got on this silly "I must win at all
>costs" rampage you more or less agreed with my point, but simply
>disagreed on the severity of the issue and insisted that if the commit
>is to be dis-allowed then there must be a manual override.

I don't think anything I have posted can be described as a rampage.  Can you
provide examples?  Also, I dropped this thread until you brought it back again.
You know what, I concede.  You win, I lose.  Can you leave us alone, now (ie
please stop continuing this thread)?


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.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]