kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>Look at it this way: why did you intially merge your changes into
>trunk if you were not going to then recopy from trunk? You might as
>well have done *only* revision 6715, and not bothered with 6713, and
>just continued branch development.
>
>Does this explain it better?
>
Yes it does, thanks! My only concern here is that in the middle of
rebranching I'd have to save and then reapply changes that didn't make
it to the trunk. I guess the decision on the merge strategy has to be
made on a per-project basis. In a corporate setting, I'd be reluctant to
use Subversion's rebranching, out of fear of losing unmerged changes
(it's more difficult to explain this to team members to begin with). So,
the question is, would I get a bigger database by using
"merge-mergeback" as opposed to "rebranch?" It looks like "yes."
Anyway, don't want to distract you all from more important things, sorry
about the noise on the list. I'll keep this thing in mind.
Sergey.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Aug 12 21:38:50 2003