> That example, while technically correct, is a little bit misleading. From a practical point of view, the thing that Pijul/Anu both do is not "automatically resolve conflicts" but rather "allow repo operations to happen even in the presence of conflicts". In Git, if you've got a conflict, Git will require you to fix it before doing anything else. In Pijul or Anu, you can continue applying changes—possibly creating more conflicts!—in a way that's guaranteed to never throw away changes. At the end of that, a human still needs to resolve those merges manually.

I don't think it is really true that git requires you to fix conflicts before continuing. There are strategies that can let you emulate deferred merging. I rarely let merging hold me back.

If I don't have time to merge into master, just do git push server master:synced/master.