Re: merge should copy-with-history

Karl Fogel wrote:

>Branko Čibej <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
>
>
>>That's on the stack, but it's not easy to do for (non-empty)
>>directories. We want to get the "svn merge" semantics right ASAP; in
>>time for 0.14.1, and fiddle with the WC functions later.
>>
>>
>
>Just a meta-comment:
>
>If by "semantics" you mean the notification output that's currently
>hosed, then +1.
>
>If you mean something deeper about merge, something that's not been
>right for a long time, then there's no need for 0.14.1 to wait on it.
>

I don't agree. Merge was broken by design, and Philip's patch unbreaks
it somewhat. See my other post.

>Most bugs are in Subversion now were there in our previous tarball,
>there are just fewer of them now. But we don't have to fix
>*everything* before releasing a tarball -- it just has to be an
>improvement over the last one :-).
>

Not everything. Just this. :-)

-- 
Brane Čibej   <brane_at_xbc.nu>   http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org