Re: 'svn revert' vs. 'svn resolve'

On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 03:34:22PM -0400, mark benedetto king wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 11, 2003, at 02:04 PM, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >Someday when we have an interactive three-way patch utility, maybe we
> >can use "svn resolve" to call it. ;-)
>
> That's exactly what Perforce's "resolve" subcommand does.

The merging process in Perforce is a bit different, though. You do 'p4
integrate', which schedules everything for merging but doesn't actually
do it, and then you do 'p4 resolve', which does the "accept your changes
/ accept their changes / drop to an editor" thing and actually changes
the working copy. There are switches like -ay for "accept your current
working version unconditionally", -at for "accept theirs", etc.

I feel that the 'p4 resolve' operation fits much better into 'svn merge'
than into a separate subcommand. In --interactive mode (or perhaps by
default, leaving --noninteractive as an option), you could have it ask
questions whenever it comes across a conflict, and fork an editor if
need be.

-- 
Colin Watson                                  [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org