Re: Clarifications on issue #504

"Eric W. Sink" <eric@sourcegear.com> writes:

> Could someone clarify exactly what will be needed to resolve this
> issue? Does "Merging" refer to the merging of branches, through
> the use of an "svn merge" subcommand, implementing the behavior
> of the -j flag in cvs?

Hi Eric.

Yes, 'svn up' does work, and it does 'merge' a tree-delta sent from
the server into the working copy. However: the tree-delta is always
between different revisions of the *same* directory.

But M9 will implement an 'svn merge' subcommand. This is a fancier
version of update, because the tree-delta will now be comparing
arbitrarily different directories -- such as moving changes between a
'trunk' directory and some 'branch' directory. And someday, we hope
to solve the 'repeated merge' problem (possibly by tracking
previously-merged changesets as properties, or somesuch.)

> Surely issue 504 does not imply a reimplementation of patch?

No.

> Can we assume that subversion 1.0 final will still require the
> presence of a separate patch program on the client side?

Yes, we should assume that. Unless somebody can produce a non-GPLed
implementation of 'diff' and 'patch', we're stuck using the external
binaries.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:51 2006