1.1 --- a/en/intro.tex	Tue Aug 26 13:55:04 2008 -0700
     1.2 +++ b/en/intro.tex	Tue Aug 26 14:06:41 2008 -0700
     1.3 @@ -373,13 +373,10 @@
     1.4  learn to use the other.  Both tools are portable to all popular
     1.5  operating systems.
     1.6  
     1.7 -Subversion lacks a history-aware merge capability, forcing its users
     1.8 -to manually track exactly which revisions have been merged between
     1.9 -branches.  If users fail to do this, or make mistakes, they face the
    1.10 -prospect of manually resolving merges with unnecessary conflicts.
    1.11 -Subversion also fails to merge changes when files or directories are
    1.12 -renamed.  Subversion's poor merge support is its single biggest
    1.13 -weakness.
    1.14 +Prior to version 1.5, Subversion had no useful support for merges.
    1.15 +At the time of writing, its merge tracking capability is new, and known to be
    1.16 +\href{http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.advanced.html#svn.branchmerge.advanced.finalword}{complicated
    1.17 +  and buggy}.
    1.18  
    1.19  Mercurial has a substantial performance advantage over Subversion on
    1.20  every revision control operation I have benchmarked.  I have measured