Re: SVN 1.5 Status -- and merge tracking

Mark Phippard wrote:

> "Subversion's merge tracking (and merge auto-calculation) code is not
> normalizing
> merge source information to real repository locations -- that is, paths and
> revisions for which the FS API function svn_fs_check_path() would not indicate a
> missing object."

That should have been "... *would* indicate a missing object" (but you were
only quoting my mistake, so...).

> 1) We almost certainly need to start recording more explicit
> information about "negated merges". Think of the scenario that you
> create a branch from trunk, and then use reverse merge to remove some
> of the revisions that came from trunk. You need to record that you do
> not have these revisions in the mergeinfo (since the implicit
> mergeinfo will say you have them). There is an issue for this.

Actually, my current thought on this is not to mess with the negated ranges.
 We will lose some auditability here, but I made an argument for why this is
fine (well, not "fine", but at least consistent with the non-branching
scenario).

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand