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.
Tony Hoyle wrote: > You've got the situation: > > 1.3 -> B1 + changes (eg. 1.3.2.5) > 1.8 -> B2 + changes (eg 1.8.2.21) > > The 'common ancestor' of both branches is 1.3, You left out the merge back from B1 to HEAD, somewhere between 1.3 and 1.8. Didn't this sort of create a new common ancestor, at the last merge point? > so the only possible (and logical) merge of B1->B2 is the entireity of B1 > onto B2. Hm... wouldn't it make sense for a branch to "inherit" all mergepoints from the branch it was created from (prior to its creation)? So that, in this case, B2 "knew" about (and considered) all mergepoints of HEAD up to 1.8? Seems logical to me. I don't see a reason why it shouldn't. Gerhard