Issue #3209: merge into missing

Hi tree conflict fans, and 1.6 fans,

my thoughts, this time regarding a subject on which I'm not
completely ignorant... :-\

The status of 1.6-blocker #3209 (see r35877):

[[[
Tackle the last holdout from issue #3209: merge encounters missing
files and dirs. Create tests that try to merge changes into missing
trees. Make them pass, given the current behavior.

The current behavior is inconsistent. A missing file is not treated
as a merge tree conflict. A missing dir, that the merge wants to
delete, is also not treated as a tree conflict.

The next steps are to determine the desired behavior, adjust the test
expectations, and set the tests to XFAIL. Then fix it!

* subversion/tests/cmdline/svntest/actions.py
   (deep_trees_rmtree): New helper function.

* subversion/tests/cmdline/merge_tests.py
   (tree_conflicts_merge_edit_onto_missing,
    tree_conflicts_merge_del_onto_missing): New tests.
   (test_list): Add new tests.
]]]

It's been suggested that we shouldn't raise any tree conflicts on
missing items.

   http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2009-02/0264.shtml

I went ahead and implemented this behavior (still testing before
commit). The tree conflicts due to local deletions are still
raised. The current change affects only missing items.

IMHO, it's OK to have no tree conflict here. The user gets a
summary at the end of the merge output, which is hard to miss.

   Summary of conflicts:
     Skipped paths: 1

And of course the user can't commit without updating to restore
the missing items.

It's a little weird that a missing file is given empty mergeinfo,
but a missing dir is not. Is that the way it's supposed to be?

Steve

-- 
Stephen Butler | Software Developer
elego Software Solutions GmbH
Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25 | 13355 Berlin | Germany
fon: +49 30 2345 8696 | mobile: +49 163 25 45 015
fax: +49 30 2345 8695 | http://www.elegosoft.com
Geschäftsführer: Olaf Wagner | Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin
Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 77719 | USt-IdNr: DE163214194