Greg Stein <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > Jane starts a Subversion txn 0.
> > > Bill starts a Subversion txn 1.
> > > Jane makes a change against 3.7 in txn 0, creating node rev 3.8
> > > Bill makes a change against 3.7 in txn 1, creating node rev 220.127.116.11.
> > > Jane aborts her txn, node rev 3.8 is removed from the database.
> > > Bill commits his txn, node rev 18.104.22.168 is committed for all time.
> > > =====> Now 22.214.171.124 exists, but 3.8 does not
> Huh? You sure?? ... I thought you would end up with 3.8 and 126.96.36.199. Bill's
> change is *not* derived from 3.8.
I'm not sure, no, but I think that the "branch" numbers don't indicate
derivation in the way you think they do. That is, 188.8.131.52 doesn't
mean "derived from 3.8", it just means "when I tried to create 3.8, I
found it was already there, so I sidetracked onto 184.108.40.206 instead".
> Therefore, you'd end up with 3.7 and 220.127.116.11. I would presume that further
> changes occur on the 3.7.1 line.
> There are still no holes, but I don't think the above numbering is correct.
> Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:25 2006