Eric Gillespie <epg@pretzelnet.org> writes:
> "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato@collab.net> writes:
>
> > > FAIL: lt-fs-test 17: merging commit
> >
> > And this one appears to be some sort of strange philosophical
> > disconnect between FSFS and BDB. The situation is the merge() case "E
> > exists neither in SOURCE nor in TARGET". In the BDB code, this
> > so-called "double delete" is allowed -- the code simply doesn't credit
> > the second deleter with the deletion. The FSFS code, however, flags a
> > conflict.
>
> We intentionally changed this in r13222. This change was meant
> to be back-ported to bdb, but I don't think anyone has been
> interested enough to do it.
Ah, so this is the first visible fallout (that I can recall) of the
merge algorithm rewrite -- svn_fs_merge() lost the ability to merge an
obviously reconcilable situation. As you state, there's no promise in
the API that says what kinds of auto-merging will and won't be done,
so we're not strictly breaking contract. Just means svn_fs_merge()
isn't nearly as useful as it could be.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Aug 3 17:36:10 2005