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

Re: Thoughts on merge tracking

From: Peter Lundblad <plundblad_at_google.com>
Date: 2007-03-09 13:24:24 CET

Folker Schamel writes:
> I would say it is more important to have a consistent wc state
> for conflict resolution (including having all files on the
> same revision, and being able to compile/test before continuing)
> than supporting edge cases of merge tracking for individual files.
Note that although the example just included two files, this applies to
whole subtrees as well. So, even if we "optimize" for whole branch
cherry-picking, we will have to support different merge info in different
parts of the subtree.

A consistent (revision-wise) state of the WC is one useful thing.
Merging as much as possible to avoid spurious conflicts that appears in parts
of the tree (including sections of files) that's going to disappear is another
one. Don't suck too much performance-wise is another.

I think we'll need one or more options that describe how to deal with
conclict situations, but that doesn't free us from picking a good default;)

> At the end, Subversion is revision based for a good reason,
> not file based like CVS.

OTOH, we're flexible regarding just working with a subset of the files of
a revision, also for a reason.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Mar 9 13:24:58 2007

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.