On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:07:18PM -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 06/20/2012 01:25 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> >> (Sorry if the above reads like a cranky old-timer putting the brakes on
> >> progress -- I trust you know that's not my intent.)
> > But it doesn't help much to say something like this without also suggesting
> > a viable alternative. I would love to see Julian move forward with this
> > work and am looking forward to learning how far it could get us.
> I agree that it doesn't help as much as you or I would like. Still, I'd
> like to think that you'd appreciate my pointing out that the petroleum I see
> dripping from beneath your car might be a reason to avoid driving it, even
> when I lack the mechanical know-how to prescribe a more specific solution. :-)
Yes, I should have phrased this differently. Sorry.
I didn't mean to say that you weren't allowed to raise your concerns.
I meant to say that I think we shouldn't discourage Julian from
following down this path. I must have read a subtext in your comment
that wasn't actually there. Your comments are actually very valuable since
they prevent us from being mislead into a situation where subtree merging
stops working for users who are relying on it.
> I too would love to see Julian move forward with this work, and I don't want
> to be a voice of discouragement for that effort. It's just the moving
> backward that bothers me. Error messages communicate to users that they're
> doing something wrong, but they aren't. Support for subtree mergeinfo and
> cherry picking are a documented part of Subversion's merge tracking feature.
Agreed. Ideally, the symmetric merge will support all currently supported
use cases, without throwing errors at users or requiring new command-line
I haven't yet made up my mind about interim measures for 1.8 though.
I suppose if symmetric merge won't support all currently supported use cases
in 1.8, we could keep the --symmetric option in place for 1.8, and drop it
in 1.9 or later once the symmetric merge code can handle all use cases?
Received on 2012-06-21 15:30:52 CEST