# HG changeset patch
# User Bryan O'Sullivan <bos@serpentine.com>
# Date 1219784801 25200
# Node ID 635d7c0fcac3176a4905e2994d6fe09869e698cb
# Parent  a168daed199ba6661cd639872199e0ec93a6c1d0# Parent  231c8469a0ec551c04cf5494b8057cee5c3499ac
Merge

diff -r a168daed199b -r 635d7c0fcac3 en/intro.tex
--- a/en/intro.tex	Tue Aug 26 13:55:04 2008 -0700
+++ b/en/intro.tex	Tue Aug 26 14:06:41 2008 -0700
@@ -373,13 +373,10 @@
 learn to use the other.  Both tools are portable to all popular
 operating systems.
 
-Subversion lacks a history-aware merge capability, forcing its users
-to manually track exactly which revisions have been merged between
-branches.  If users fail to do this, or make mistakes, they face the
-prospect of manually resolving merges with unnecessary conflicts.
-Subversion also fails to merge changes when files or directories are
-renamed.  Subversion's poor merge support is its single biggest
-weakness.
+Prior to version 1.5, Subversion had no useful support for merges.
+At the time of writing, its merge tracking capability is new, and known to be
+\href{http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.advanced.html#svn.branchmerge.advanced.finalword}{complicated
+  and buggy}.
 
 Mercurial has a substantial performance advantage over Subversion on
 every revision control operation I have benchmarked.  I have measured