23 May
2019
23 May
'19
9:14 a.m.
Hi Vincent, all,
On 22/05/2019 11:03, Vincent Massol wrote:
--
Simon Urli
Software Engineer at XWiki SAS
simon.urli(a)xwiki.com
More about us at http://www.xwiki.com
Hi Simon,
We have an automatic fallback in case of conflict, for which we can
choose the strategy: use current, previous or next version. By default
the strategy is to take the current version.
So the merge is never stucked in case of conflict, by default it returns
the current version.
Simon
On 22 May 2019, at 10:45, Simon Urli
<simon.urli(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm working on the merge on save for the roadmap of 11.5 and I need some decision to
be taken.
The main idea of the merge on save, is to try to merge users work in case of save
conflict. Knowing that the merge might led to merge conflict in case of edits on the same
places. Those merge conflict can be tackled automatically, but a priority will be then
given to one version over another.
I first propose to add an option in user profile, so users would have the possibility to
choose between:
1. Always merge automatically the work, even in case of merge conflict
I don’t understand this part. If there’s a conflict it means it cannot be merged… So
would it do? Take latest version and overwrite previous version? 2. Always merge automatically, but ask what to
do in case of merge conflict
3. Always ask what to do in case of save conflict
Now the question is: what should be the default option?
Certainly not 1! 2 is really the best to me.
Thanks
-Vincent
Option 1 looks like a good fit for decreasing the
number of clicks to do, but I'm a bit afraid that in case of conflict they would have
the same feeling as before the warning conflict window: i.e. to loose some part of their
work.
WDYT?
Simon
--
Simon Urli
Software Engineer at XWiki SAS
simon.urli(a)xwiki.com
More about us at http://www.xwiki.com