This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 65783 - [50cat] Impossible to correctly merge a class. And no version nr appears in resolve conflict window.
Summary: [50cat] Impossible to correctly merge a class. And no version nr appears in r...
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 25501
Alias: None
Product: utilities
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Diff (show other bugs)
Version: 5.x
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P2 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Martin Entlicher
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-10-04 00:24 UTC by vbrabant
Modified: 2005-10-04 10:54 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: ENHANCEMENT
Exception Reporter:


Attachments
Resolve Conflict window (120.96 KB, image/jpeg)
2005-10-04 00:24 UTC, vbrabant
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description vbrabant 2005-10-04 00:24:11 UTC
[ BUILD # : Beta ]
[ JDK VERSION : 1.5.0_05 ]

I am people A working on class MyClass.
I added a method called Addition

You are people B working on the same class MyClass.
You added a method called concatenation.

You commit successfully in CVS.
I commit in CVS. But I receive an error message. I have to update my source before.
I update the MyClass.java file.
And I obtain a Local Conflict. I right-click and select Resolve Conflict.

Now I see the screen I attached.

How can I accept both methods ?
Would be nice if I could modify the result after merge part.

Also, would be nice if it could indicate the version of the file locally (local 1.1) and remotely (remote 1.2) and the result after merge (local 1.2)
Comment 1 vbrabant 2005-10-04 00:24:38 UTC
Created attachment 25478 [details]
Resolve Conflict window
Comment 2 _ pkuzel 2005-10-04 09:57:25 UTC
Passing to merge guru...
Comment 3 Martin Entlicher 2005-10-04 10:54:32 UTC
This behavior is there from the very beginning. We need to improve the GUI
(issue #50273). This problem is already submitted as issue #25501.

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 25501 ***