Re: Patch command execution

Philip Martin <philip@codematters.co.uk> writes:

> > This, to me, seems like a grand idea. So update would do something
> > like:
> >
> > cp working_file working_file.00000.12345.rej
> > apply diff3 contextual diffs to the rej-file
> > if diffs apply cleanly
> > rm working_file; mv rej-file working_file
> > else
> > list rej-file in the entries file and mark working_file as conflicted
> >
> > I really, really like this idea.
>
> Doesn't this mean that the working file will not contain those bits of
> the patch that apply cleanly? And that the rej-file will contain
> changes that don't conflict? That's not what I would expect.

That's correct. I means that conflict resolution is this simple:

   edit out the conflict markers in working_file.00000.12345.rej
   rm working_file
   mv working_file.00000.12345.rej working_file

So it gives the same beautifully easy CVS conflict resolution
mechanism plus protection against checking in bogosity (without at
least some human intervention).

> Philip, who *likes* the current behaviour.

To each his (or her) own, of course. If I can ask without trying to
sound like I'm stirring an argument: how often do you have to resolve
conflicts in Subversion trees? I only know how often *I* have to do
so, and how painful it is.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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