[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: Re: pointing diff3-cmd to false.bat does not seem to work for me

From: Michael Toal <Michael.Toal_at_octec.co.uk>
Date: 2006-10-27 11:48:11 CEST

Sorry for the delay in responding.

> Again, your description is faulty. You simply cannot do that. You
cannot
> checkout an old revision and then commit it; you have to be updated to

> HEAD before the commit will be accepted. Likewise, if you checkout a
tag
> you cannot commit it back to trunk.

> Maybe he made some changes, then updated and got a load of conflicts.
If
> he then opted to use the entire content of his file rather than
resolve
> the conflicts properly, that would cause the overwriting your
describe.
> But in that case the problem was caused by a user doing the manual
merge
> incorrectly, so your solution of forcing manual merges doesn't seem
like
> a sound answer.

I have to give up on this one as between us we cant figure out what went
on.
Thanks though for the explanation that you need to be updated to the
HEAD before the commit will be accepted.

> If you want to take the paranoid approach, a better solution would be
to
> apply the svn:needs-lock property to every file. That way all files in

> the checkout are read-only until you obtain a lock, and only one
working
> copy can hold a lock at one time, so you are serialising the changes.
> This is effectively SourceSafe mode. Personally I don't like it, but
> some companies require it.

I don't like it either, and I am trying to avoid it.
Keeping all files read-only until a lock is obtained also seems to be
serializing development.
I'm not sure what svn would do on a later update if someone changed the
read only attribute and changed the code.

The point that people are making to me is that a change in file A can
may have an impact on your code in file B.
So, they want to review the changes on update, by manually merging the
files - Always.

OK so the problem I still have is this scenario:
2 developers both checkout the same revision.
Developer A makes changes to file 1 - which will impact on Developer B
code changes to file 2
Developer A commits changes
Developer B changes file 2
Developer B updates
Updates from developer A are merged into developer B's code -
automatically.
Those updates caused an intermittent bug, when combined to changes made
to file 2.

I had hoped that pointing diff-cmd to false.bat would cause this to
happen, but it doesn't seem to work for me.

Pointing diff3-cmd to false.bat forces a conflict on update when both
developers have made changes to the same file.

Sorry to labour the point.
Thanks for all the good work.
This is the tool I want to use.

Michael.
 

-- 
        ___
   oo  // \\      "De Chelonian Mobile"
  (_,\/ \_/ \     TortoiseSVN
    \ \_/_\_/>    The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
    /_/   \_\     http://tortoisesvn.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star.The service is powered by MessageLabs. 
________________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on Fri Oct 27 11:50:21 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the TortoiseSVN Users mailing list.