Atomic merge?

[Martin Geisler]

"Dave Mateer" <dave_mateer at ntm.org> writes:

> We are evaluating the use of Mercurial for version-control of Xml
> files for an application. Some of the Xml files need to be treated
> atomically. It cannot be possible for user A's revision 5 of File1.xml
> to be merged into user B's repository without user A's revision 5 of
> File2.xml, if that makes any sense.
>
> Naturally, commits are atomic in Mercurial. But in the case of a
> conflict in File1.xml at the point of a merge, it appears that
> File2.xml will still update. Is there a way to make merges atomic so
> that the entire revision (all files) either succeeds or fails
> together?

No, but if I understand you correctly you can get atomic updates quite
easily: do the merge in a different clone. If successful, you commit and
push to the place where you need the simultaneous update of File1.xml
and File2.xml.

That way the target clone will always see atomic updates (i.e, full
changesets) to all files.

-- 
Martin Geisler

VIFF (Virtual Ideal Functionality Framework) brings easy and efficient
SMPC (Secure Multiparty Computation) to Python. See: http://viff.dk/.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20090528/f9057d50/attachment.pgp