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

Re: Patch command execution

From: Daniel Berlin <dan_at_dberlin.org>
Date: 2002-02-08 07:14:05 CET

On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Mo DeJong wrote:

> On 07 Feb 2002 23:10:00 -0600
> Karl Fogel <kfogel@newton.ch.collab.net> wrote:
> ...
> > IMHO, we don't want to keep the .rej files. Let's use conflict
> > markers instead, and use a timestamp to tell if the conflict should be
> > considered resolved. I.e., if the file has been modified since it
> > received the conflict, we assume the conflict is resolved. We don't
> > check if conflict markers are present or absent -- that's too likely
> > to prevent "valid" commits, and if we have the timestamp solution
> > anyway, that's enough.
> >
> > Comments? Suggestions? Rotten fruit? :-)
> Please don't do that. We don't want to leave conflict markers in files
> because someone always screws up conflict resolution and you
> end up with a bunch of <<<<<< characters in your files.
> I am not joking, this happens all the time.

I have a hard time believing this.
So i grepped gcc's cvs repo, and it appears to have only ever happened
once outside of the changelogs (where it happens every 200 revisions or
It was only on a branch, too, which is only used by
one person (IE it's understandable in this case).

Maybe you need people who are more careful to make sure they haven't
broken something with their checkin?
I mean, it's usually very hard to have compiling source with "<<<<<<<" in

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:37:05 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.