> Conflict resolution doesn’t seem to be an issue for radicle as the owner of the repo (if I understand this correctly) is the one that needs to accepts patches and will have to republish on IPNS
This isn't quite what happens. Anyone who is authorised to do
so (according to the semantics of the radicle code of the
machine) can accept patches. They do this by forming a valid
input (a radicle expression), with the correct signatures
etc. This input is then sent to the owner via pubsub, so you are
right that it is then the owner which republished on IPNS. The
owner doesn't have to do anything manually though, this is all
done automatically by the daemon. The assumption is that the
owner will republish anything that is correct according to the
machine's semantics, but it is true that the owner can censor
otherwise valid inputs.
This isn't quite what happens. Anyone who is authorised to do so (according to the semantics of the radicle code of the machine) can accept patches. They do this by forming a valid input (a radicle expression), with the correct signatures etc. This input is then sent to the owner via pubsub, so you are right that it is then the owner which republished on IPNS. The owner doesn't have to do anything manually though, this is all done automatically by the daemon. The assumption is that the owner will republish anything that is correct according to the machine's semantics, but it is true that the owner can censor otherwise valid inputs.