<html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/05/2013 01:37 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote: </div> <blockquote cite="mid:52A0738E.60302@redhat.com" type="cite">Consider this scenario: - Nathaniel submits RADIUS patches that update the API version (from 2.69 to 2.70) - I have ACI patches that also bump the version (from 2.69 to 2.70) - Nathaniel's patches gets accepted - I rebase my ACI patches onto master. Git thinks that the 2.69->2.70 change is already done, so it leaves VERSION unchanged. I can solve this locally by telling Git to not merge VERSION automatically, but I think it would be helpful to add a unique comment to each change so that everyone gets a conflict cases like this. Do you agree? <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset> <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________ Freeipa-devel mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Freeipa-devel@redhat.com">Freeipa-devel@redhat.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel</a></pre> </blockquote> Makes sense to me. I'd just add a comment so that the purpose of the last change comment is also obvious for the new developer perusing the VERSION file. Maybe something along the lines of: ######################################################## IPA_API_VERSION_MAJOR=2 IPA_API_VERSION_MINOR=70 +# Update the last change entry to enforce conflict on merging two independent branches into master. +# Last change: npmccallum - RADIUS support <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- Tomas Babej Associate Software Engeneer | Red Hat | Identity Management RHCE | Brno Site | IRC: tbabej | freeipa.org</pre> </body> </html>