[cvsnt] Re: Force conflict

[Glen Starrett]

Gabriel Genellina wrote:
> Hello
> 
> Is there a way to do the following?:
> I want that *any* time a merge is needed, it's marked as a conflict.
> I don't want any automatic merges, no matter how trivial they would be; 
> I want all merges resolved by the developers.
> In other words, if I modify a file in my sandbox and another user 
> commited a new revision, when I do a cvs update I want it to be flagged 
> as a conflict, even if the modified lines are far apart.
> (You may think it's a bit paranoic -maybe- but we have good reasons to 
> review all changes before merge)

Marking the files as binary will force a conflict.  It's not the easiest 
way to proceed though since there won't be any merging happening.

There are better ways of reviewing changes though, assuming that is your 
intention.  Here's a scenario I have used with some newer developers:

-- Deny all to commit to HEAD.

-- Create developer branch and grant the appropriate developer 
permissions to it.

-- When they are done with their package, they merge from HEAD to their 
branch to get the latest changes, test, and commit.  Then they notify me 
as the merge-master.

-- I have a local sandbox set to HEAD, I merge in their changes from the 
branch.  Then I can do a diff on all the changes they are bringing in.

-- Once inspected and approved, the changes are committed to head.

If you just want to inspect all the changes, then you could use a mailer 
program that sends to you a diff of all changes committed.  That could 
also be sent to a maillist / archive for distribution and storage.

Hope this helps.

-- 
Glen Starrett