Re: Merge tracking proposal

Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org> wrote:

> The reason I said "there is simply nothing you can do about this" in
> reference to the length of the lists as the number of merges grows
> large. No matter how much you minimize, there is always a worst case
> that will make the lists large. For example, merging every 3rd
> revision would produce lists that can't be minimized.

Sure, but let's remember that all users following the "Repeated Merge" pattern
(which, in my experience, are the most) *will* benefit from normalization of
revision range with insertion of phantom revisions. For them, the
merge-tracking info would always be a compact range like: /trunk@123:1-4691.

As for your case of merging every 3rd revision, what about the other revisions?
If you add support for "Block/Unblock Change Set" (which I see it's not in your
proposal), and people do block the other revisions, you could still show a
compact range in request to an user query (if and only if you take care of
phantom revisions at the same time).

Giovanni Bajo

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon May 8 11:27:12 2006