Mark Phippard wrote:
> I am going to post this in this thread because it is related.
>
> Let's say that 1.5 is released without the issue-2897 branch included.
> If that is the case, we still need to decide how to handle reflective
> revisions in 1.5. The choices just become more crude:
>
> 1) We include those revisions in the merge. That means we will be
> repeating merge, but also not losing the parts not related to the
> merge.
>
> 2) Skip those revisions in the merge. That means we will lose the
> parts of the merge that were not related to the merge.
>
> I would probably favor #1. I think we try to do some form of #2
> today. I know that code had problems, I am not sure if it was
> removed.
>
>
Yes we do #2. snip from
subversion/libsvn_client/merge.c:filter_reflected_revisions
if (src_rangelist_for_tgt)
SVN_ERR(svn_rangelist_remove(requested_rangelist, src_rangelist_for_tgt,
*requested_rangelist,
FALSE, pool));
This logic is faulty (origin of issue 2897)
I would remove it on trunk after testing. Will propose the same for back
porting to 1.5.x.
With regards
Kamesh Jayachandran
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-01-31 07:52:04 CET