[petsc-dev] rebase question

[Jed Brown]

On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 15:26, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

> Come on, it is total bullshit (as Jed notes) that these systems change the
> mtime of files they don't need to touch. That is moronic, I don't care how
> much "easier" it makes their life in writing hg and git.


Both implementations "expect" the worst case (a conflict), so they update
the working tree so that conflicts can be resolved in-tree.

I agree with resolving conflicts in-tree, but I think they should attempt
the rebase without touching the working tree and only modify the working
tree in case of a conflict. I don't know how difficult this would be to
implement, it depends how rebase is currently implemented and what data
structures are available.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20110905/d98cf859/attachment.html>