Skip to content

Conversation

scott2000
Copy link
Contributor

I'm planning to try to add conflict labels to MergedTree and MergedTreeId (#7692), and it will be easier to add them if both are structs with similar methods. Since we don't support reading/writing legacy conflicts anymore (as far as I'm aware), I think it should be safe to delete the MergedTreeId::Legacy variant now.

Checklist

If applicable:

  • I have updated CHANGELOG.md
  • I have updated the documentation (README.md, docs/, demos/)
  • I have updated the config schema (cli/src/config-schema.json)
  • I have added/updated tests to cover my changes

@scott2000 scott2000 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 18, 2025 14:23
Copy link
Member

@martinvonz martinvonz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks

@scott2000 scott2000 force-pushed the scott2000/remove-legacy-merged-tree branch from c09ae21 to f41d655 Compare October 19, 2025 03:14
I'm planning to try to add conflict labels to `MergedTree` and
`MergedTreeId`, and it will be easier to add them if both are structs
with similar methods. Since we don't support reading/writing legacy
conflicts anymore (as far as I'm aware), I think it should be safe to
delete the `MergedTreeId::Legacy` variant now.
This is consistent with `MergedTreeId::into_merge`.
@scott2000 scott2000 force-pushed the scott2000/remove-legacy-merged-tree branch from f41d655 to 6408973 Compare October 19, 2025 13:11
@scott2000 scott2000 added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 19, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit cbfceb6 Oct 19, 2025
29 checks passed
@scott2000 scott2000 deleted the scott2000/remove-legacy-merged-tree branch October 19, 2025 13:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants