I've tripped on a problem in the merge logic. Here is the question.
If I say "merge that thing and this thing", the logic finds the nearest common ancestor and does the merge. This follows Josh's logic -- I claim no credit.
The question is whether we ever need to be able to get the branch and version of the common ancestor. Is it important to be able to say what the common point was?
To put it another way:
Is it desirable if merge can include diagnostic output such as:
merged branchA:27:foo.c into working foo.c using branchMumble:54:foo.c as common ancestor.
??
I don't *think* it's a problem to do this, but it's certainly simpler to avoid it.
Reactions?
shap