You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As the title says - if two users do an update of a feature independently, but the actual change is the same (e.g. both change an attribute value of the same feature from 40 to 42), geodiff will generate a rebase conflict file. Ideally this should not happen, because there wasn't really any conflict, so we should detect such cases and skip reporting conflicts, because that's confusing to users if they see conflict files appearing.
Try to run this command using test data from geodiff:
In short, we are trying to rebase a diff on top of the same diff, so there should be no conflict and the rebased diff should be empty. But instead we are getting a conflict file:
When the final value (of a given row in a given column) would end up
the same after two concurrent edits, geodiff would still produce conflicts,
confusing users why would they appear. This commit adds handling of that
case.
When the final value (of a given row in a given column) would end up
the same after two concurrent edits, geodiff would still produce conflicts,
confusing users why would they appear. This commit adds handling of that
case.
When the final value (of a given row in a given column) would end up
the same after two concurrent edits, geodiff would still produce conflicts,
confusing users why would they appear. This commit adds handling of that
case.
As the title says - if two users do an update of a feature independently, but the actual change is the same (e.g. both change an attribute value of the same feature from 40 to 42), geodiff will generate a rebase conflict file. Ideally this should not happen, because there wasn't really any conflict, so we should detect such cases and skip reporting conflicts, because that's confusing to users if they see conflict files appearing.
Try to run this command using test data from geodiff:
In short, we are trying to rebase a diff on top of the same diff, so there should be no conflict and the rebased diff should be empty. But instead we are getting a conflict file:
(the gpkg_contents changes should have been ignored when reading the source diff, that's probably another minor issue to handle)
And the rebased diff looks like this instead of being empty:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: