On Thu, 03 Aug 2006, Malcolm Rowe wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 12:51:14PM -0700, Daniel Rall wrote:
> > > So I guess I'm curious - what should a merge tracking solution do with
> > > something like that, in general?
> >
> > This was a manual change and commit made to both branches (e.g. no
> > merge), so we wouldn't be modifying any merge history here.
>
> Sorry, I wasn't clear enough. I meant: should merge tracking (either
> generally or specifically) treat that revision as available to be merged
> to other branches? (either 1.4.x or another branch).
Yes. As an example, I'll eventually want to merge this change into
the merge-tracking branch itself. A merge of the available revisions
from trunk into the merge-tracking branch should include this
revision, and apply the changes which were made in the trunk sub-tree
of the repository to the merge-tracking branch.
If I wanted to mark this change as merged from trunk into the 1.4.x
branch, I could do so by tweaking the "svn:mergeinfo" property on
"/branches/1.4.x" or "/branches/1.4.x/subversion/include/svn_wc.h".
Similar functionality is available from svnmerge.py via
'svnmerge.py merge --record-only -r20951'.
FWIW, the way the merge-tracking branch works today, I believe that
this change would also be 'svn merge'-able into both "/trunk" and
"/branches/1.4.x" (though it produces no output, rather than the 'G' I
mentioned thinking it would in response to Garrett's mail).
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Thu Aug 3 23:44:00 2006