Two agent pull requests conflict. What is the sound way to resolve it?
Why A is the answer
Merge one, update the other from it, then review the result
Standard merge practice still applies. Sequence the merges and re-review after resolving.
In detail
- Merge one, then update the other from it.
- Review the result, because a conflict can hide a logic problem.
- Run the tests after you resolve the conflict.
Use case
An illustrative scenario, not a real incident.
Two agent pull requests conflict. The team merges one, updates the other from it, and reviews the result, since a clean merge can still hide a logic clash.
See it in different ways
flowchart TD A["Coordinator"] --> B["Agent 1 on branch a"] A --> C["Agent 2 on branch b"] B --> D["Pull request a"] C --> E["Pull request b"] D --> F["Review and merge in order"] E --> F
stateDiagram-v2 [*] --> CheckDependencies CheckDependencies --> Sequential: one step needs another CheckDependencies --> Parallel: work is independent Sequential --> Handoff: clear artifact Parallel --> Isolated: own branch or workspace Handoff --> [*] Isolated --> [*]
flowchart LR S0["Merge first pull request"] --> S1["Update the second"] --> S2["Resolve conflicts"] --> S3["Review and test"]
Key point: Merge one, update the other, then review.
Why the other options are wrong
- B. Close both pull requests and ask the team to write the code by hand
- Closing both throws away good work.
- C. Tell both agents to wait until the conflict has gone away by itself
- A conflict does not resolve itself.
- D. Force push whichever branch was finished last onto the main branch
- A force push can erase work.