On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak) <sten...@gmail.com> wrote: > My assumption was that conflicts were simply mathematically inevitable in a > DVCSs, that's why your mention about lack of conflict markers sparked my > interest... you mention conflicts like they can be optional? If so, are > conflicts "eliminated" by choosing an arbitrary merging strategy when > conflicts *do* happen (e.g. "choose the last timestamped patch and lose > information on the way, we don't care"), or can they be prevented from ever > happening in the first place?
They're inevitable in patch based systems because patches usually have a line level granularity. OT usually uses individual character positions. In OT, if two operations both delete the same character, the character gets deleted once. If two clients insert a character at the same position, one of the characters will be first in the resultant document and one will be second. Conflict markers just aren't necessary. -J > -- > Saludos, > Bruno González > > _______________________________________________ > Jabber: stenyak AT gmail.com > http://www.stenyak.com
