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

Re: short question about merge [PROPOSAL] vs. tree-deltas

From: Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu>
Date: 2003-04-17 00:23:25 CEST

Philip Martin wrote:

>"Sander Striker" <striker@apache.org> writes:
>
>
>
>>>From: Tom Lord [mailto:lord@emf.net]
>>>Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 2:28 AM
>>>
>>>Let's suppose that the trees for ANCESTOR and ORIG have:
>>>
>>>
>>> dir1/file1 == node_N.copy_C.rev_R
>>> dir2/file2 == node_N.copy_C.rev_R
>>>
>>>(Note that the two file-rev nodes are identical.)
>>>
>>>
>>This can't happen AFAIK.
>>
>>
>
>At present two files can only share the same node revision id if they
>are the result of copying directories, in which case the files will
>have the same basename. So
>
> dir1/file1 == node_N.copy_C.rev_R
> dir2/file1 == node_N.copy_C.rev_R
>
>can occur.
>

Yes, that can occur... (sorry Sander, I didn't think of lazy copying).
However, in that case, it's the same file, there's nothing to merge

>It's possible that when (or should that be if?) atomic move gets
>implemented then the original scenario will occur.
>
>
No, Bill Tutt thought up a way to avoid this, and IIRC it's already
implemented in his branch.

-- 
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 Thu Apr 17 00:24:09 2003

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