Re: Even more merge thoughts...

On 29.11.2011 12:31, Hans-Emil Skogh wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> Now with svn 1.7.2 coming up this might not be the best timing to
> come dragging with some more merge thoughts. But hey, is there ever a
> good time? :-)
>
> Here are a few points that have come up during this round of merges:
>
> - The Merge dialog contains the helpful hint "To merge all revisions,
> leave the box empty.". I have to keep remind people that this is
> indeed the case, and there's no need to enter any revision numbers if
> it's not cherry picking that we are after. Maybe it would be a good
> idea to add a checkbox that says something like "Merge all
> revisions", that is checked by default and hides/grays out the rest
> of the "Revision range to merge" controls. Unchecking this box would
> enable/show the controls again. This would make it clear even for new
> users that SVN will by default help you with the merging and there is
> no need to do select anything explicitly if you don't want to.

Can you please open an issue for this?
Just note that this is an enhancement and therefor will have to wait
until 1.8.0.

> - In the Merge dialog when the "Show log" button is clicked, the Log
> dialog that opens will list revisions as far back as it can. This is
> mostly not what you want. I would say that the usual case would be to
> show revisions that are younger than the branch. Doing this would
> prevent the additional clutter of showing lots of revisions that are
> already, implicitly, part of the branch. I would suggest to add yet
> another checkbox to the log dialog that says "Stop on branch
> creation". This checkbox would _only_ be visible when the log dialog
> is opened from the Merge dialog. The check box should be checked by
> default.

When the log dialog is started from the merge dialog, the "stop on copy"
checkbox is checked by default. So it should stop at the branch creation.

>
> Then there's the topic of "Test merge". I have more or less stopped
> using it since it does not really provide any time benefit, and the
> predicted conflicts are mostly greatly exaggerated. Is there really
> no way to make the test merge more accurate when it comes to
> predicting conflicts?

You'd have to ask that on the svn mailing list.
But I think it's not possible without actually executing the merge.

> - When a Test merge is performed, I would suggest changing from the
> red "conflicted" to an orange "potential conflict", to highlight that
> this is only an assumed conflict. The manual clearly states this, but
> not everyone reads the manual...

Good idea. Could you please file an issue for this as well?

Stefan

-- 
        ___
   oo  // \\      "De Chelonian Mobile"
  (_,\/ \_/ \     TortoiseSVN
    \ \_/_\_/>    The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
    /_/   \_\     http://tortoisesvn.net
------------------------------------------------------
http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=757&dsMessageId=2889125
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [dev-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].