On 9/15/06, Daniel Rall <dlr@collab.net> wrote:
> As a follow-up to r21504, I fixed merge_tests.py 7 and 8 in r21511
> (basically by reverting earlier r20438, which made the tests incorrect
> now that the code is closer to being correct).
>
> Test 17 seems to be a little more tricky, as part of its merge
> succeeds, and part of it is skipped.
>
> Under dir "C", we create unversioned file "foo". Then we merge a tree
> ("F") which contains versioned file "foo" and some other stuff into
> "C":
>
> WC:
> ---
> C/
> foo
>
> Merge source:
> -------------
> F/
> foo
> Q/
> bar
>
> "foo" is skipped (because it's obstructed), while "Q" and "Q/bar" are
> merged successfully. Where in the WC should the merge info be
> recorded?
>
> My feeling is that merge info should apply to "Q" (and thus implicity
> to "bar", by inheritance). It should not apply to "foo" (because it
> was not merged). However, what about "C", which had partial merge of
> r2 succeed? Because part of the merge was skipped, I tend to think
> that it should not have merge info recorded on it.
I actually disagree, it should be recorded because part of it
succeeded. Similar to what happens if we get a conflict on part of a
file, once the conflict is resolved (perhaps excluding the portion
that conflicted entirely) we still record that the merge of that
revision occurred.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Sep 15 21:26:40 2006