On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Kamesh Jayachandran wrote:
> >Kamesh, thanks for the test fix -- I've committed to the branch as
> >r21577 with some tweaks. While correct handling of merge info for the
> >3-way merge really doesn't work yet, this is an incremental step in
> >the right direction (documented in the TODO file). It's great than
> >you were able to make forward progress and fix a test at the same
> >time!
>
> Should we change our 'svn:mergeinfo' format a bit take care of '3 way
> merges'?
> Like 'pathname:revlist'|pathname1@rev1-pathname2@rev2'?
I don't understand this.
The current plan for handling 3-way merges is described in the TODO
file:
* A better solution requires that either the client or server know
the merge info for both the WC and repos. This would be
implemented by transfering the merge info for the versioned
sub-tree(s) involved in the merge to or from the repository via a
(new?) RA operation, allowing the calculation of which merges
remain. The plan is to do this processing on the server-side, an
unfortunate difference from the more typical 'merge -rX:Y' style
of operation (which will be kept client-side to offload more
processing from the server).
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Thu Sep 21 19:31:11 2006