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

Update problem: Tree conflicts vs content conflicts

From: Erik Huelsmann <ehuels_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2005-09-07 20:56:21 CEST

Currently, libsvn_wc ignores tree changes when updating a workingcopy. I think this is a bug.
Have a look at this transcript:
$ svnadmin create ./repos --fs-type fsfs$ svn co file://`pwd`/repos wc$ cd wc/$ echo you >a$ svn add a$ svn ci -m ""$ cd ..$ svn co file://`pwd`/repos wc2$ cd wc2$ echo mine >>a$ svn ci -m ""$ cd ../wc# break history here$ svn rm a$ echo you >a$ svn add a$ svn up$ svn st# shows R a$ cat a# shows>you>mine
 As you can see, svn merged the changes into 'a' without so much as awarning. I think this sholud be a conflict though: the file beingchanged is not related anymore to the file which was originallymodified on the other branch. The update operation should haveresulted in a 'C'onflict.
Why is this important? Well, as soon as we start to supportreplacements with history in the working copy, this situation(although it will involve add-with-history) may occur more often thanit has now: if a merge a replacement from a branch, the files have ahigher 'risk' to look alike (and thus for merge to succeed).
Should this be addressed or filed as an issue?
/me hopes to make sense

bye,

Erik.
Received on Wed Sep 7 20:57:12 2005

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