If it works precisely as you say, then most likely the last committer wins, and that's bad. The most hopeful case is that there is ONE place that isn't 'strict

If it works precisely as you say, then most likely the last committer wins, and that's bad. The most hopeful case is that there is ONE place that isn't 'strictly append only', and that's, for lack of a better term, the 'main pointer'. Which hash is the actual state of the app as it should be compiled and deployed right now? Then THAT conflict, together with tooling to diff 2 different hashes, should swiftly lead to figuring it out. But then you're still kinda hosed; how do you merge 2 nodes? It sounds like you can't; you can only pick one. With git, you can do a text merge. I get the beauty of AST based storage and reasoning, but, hey, trying to use git to merge 2 versions of a word doc together is also a disaster, so it sounds like it'd be the same here. In that sense, unison is worse than your average (text based) language, not better. That's not actually a downside though; it's different. If I demerited the language for this, that's akin to complaining about a delicious roasted bell pepper because it doesn't taste anything like an onion. But I do find it a spot irksome that the otherwise well written tour is implying something here that doesn't appear to be true. Perhaps I'm merely misinterpreting it and reading more into that sentence than is implied.