Firstly, you would only have a semilattice (ie you have join but not meet). It sort of gives you the notion of a merge but maybe not the best thing ever. One th

Firstly, you would only have a semilattice (ie you have join but not meet). It sort of gives you the notion of a merge but maybe not the best thing ever. One thing to note is that it isn’t a good model of common vc systems as join must be associative and those systems do not have associative merges. I guess you could imagine your state to be the join of all its patches. That makes sense if you have an “add foo” patch and a “delete foo” patch and join them to get a “empty but remembering that foo was there once state” (which is required because joining “add foo” again must do nothing). But you also need to accept that “delete foo” on its own is a valid state (or any “resolve this merge conflict” patch) and it feels not great for that to be a valid state. Generally I think you want slightly more constraints (than none) in which things may be merged or valid repo states.