mergemaster broken?

[Doug Barton]

John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> Robert Watson wrote this message on Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 09:38 +0000:
>> So while I don't have opinions about the implementation details, I think 
>> what Ruslan is proposing is architecturally the right thing.  How to handle 
>> the command line argument, I don't have an opinion, except that user 
>> surprise is bad, so a new argument with some compatibility and a warning is 
>> probably better than changing "-m".
> 
> Why not detect etc as the last component of -m and print a nice little
> warning, and then remove /etc from the path?  (or adding .. if we end
> up with an empty path)..   and after a year or so, remove the warning
> and the compat code... 

That's basically the direction I'm looking at right now.

> I doubt people are doing something really crazy
> like making foobarbaz a symlink to etc, and depending upon that..  If
> they are, they get what the deserve...

My concern is more people who have scripted solutions that include the -m
argument, but I'm sure that we can make this work.

Doug

-- 

    This .signature sanitized for your protection