Squeak, source control, subversion, versioning, monticello, all that good stuff.

Bert Freudenberg bert at impara.de
Sun Jan 29 12:42:09 UTC 2006

Am 29.01.2006 um 08:41 schrieb Avi Bryant:

> What do you find weak about the merge and diff tools in Monticello?

The automatic merging works very nicely for us. I even find myself  
formatting methods so they produce a nice diff ;-) Like, we have a  
method that lists the versions of packages used to build an image.  
It's laid-out as one line per package, so in the diff each changed  
package stands out visually :)

However, *if* there are conflicts, tool support is lacking. Apart  
from the wording in the merge-browser's interface, which I got used  
to, I'd like to properly resolve conflicts right there while merging.  
Currently it's either-or: you have to keep your method or replace it  
with the incoming method.

As a work-around, I usually accept all the incoming methods, but open  
a method browser on each of them. After the merge I go to each one to  
properly adjust the code manually, using the changes-based diff to  
see what happened.

It'd be very nice to be able to edit the new method right there in  
the merge browser. Visually, a three-pane layout showing the old, the  
new, and the merged hand-edited version would be very nice. But only  
being able to edit the code in a single pane would be an improvement,  

Fortunately, it happens not very often we actually have conflicts,  
and even then, the majority can be resolved by using either the old  
or the new version. But I guess the remaining cases are what people  
mean when they ask for a better 3-way merge.

- Bert -

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list