Here's what I understand:
When I merge my changes into "master," it's generally a seamless process. However, if another developer has been working on the same file in a different branch and goes to merge his changes into "master," at that point there's a potential problem. Reason being is that unless you manually inspect the changes that were made by both developers, you wind up potentially overwriting the work of one developer with the efforts of another.
I recently uploaded some work to my team's Github. There are some "conflicts" that need to be resolved.
Do I take care of that or do the others who approved the changes resolve the conflicts?
I made a copy of the work that I did and then did a "rebase" with the newest version of my base branch and I was able to see the same conflicts on my local box. Assuming this is what my team lead is going to have to sort through, am I not doing my due diligence by breaking out a difftool and attempting to resolve some of these conflicts myself?
It may very well be foolish question, but if this is considered standard operating procedure, I'd like to tackle that before Monday.
Do you typically resolve conflicts yourself or is that reserved for those who approved the pull request?