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

Re: [PROPOSAL] Merging Improved

From: Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu>
Date: 2003-04-11 09:05:50 CEST

Sander Striker wrote:

>>From: Branko Cibej [mailto:brane@xbc.nu]
>>Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 12:13 AM
>>>No. Consider attached example. Ofcourse you always bring forward
>>>interesting cases ;). In this case I clearly forgot about something.
>>>We need to find _all_ the branchpoints of M until we hit the path of the
>>>MCRA, and either record them all or decide to infer them at the time
>>>we need them. The latter could lead to some brute force searching
>>>at a later point in time though (for every source merged that doesn't
>>>have an entry in svn:merged-from yet).
>>Aha! Well then, I'd suggest to record the branch point at the time of
>>the branch.
>The reason I didn't want to do this is that copies aren't copies anymore
>since the copied-to tree will have svn:merged-from properties attached
>to it, which the copied-from tree clearly won't have.
Oof, you're right.

> For tagging this
>information is completely irrelevant, so it will bite users that do a
>lot of tagging but no branching. This will also make the copy operation
>more expensive than O(1), which I think is a no-go.

And right again. Lazy propchange during lazy copy is not something I'd
want to contemplate. Brrrr.

Luckily, all that information is available in the node history.

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
Received on Fri Apr 11 09:06:33 2003

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.