Paul Burba wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kamesh Jayachandran
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 8:29 AM
>> To: Mark Phippard
>> Cc: Paul Burba; Subversion Development; Daniel Rall; Peter N.
>> Lundblad; email@example.com
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Stop mer'G'e notification for files
>> with local mods that are unchanged by merge
>> Mark Phippard wrote:
>>> On 4/4/07, *Paul Burba* <firstname.lastname@example.org
>>> When merging into a file with preexisting local
>> modifications, our
>>> in merge.c:merge_file_changed() always reports a
>> mer'G'e has occurred,
>>> even if the merge made no change to the file (i.e.
>>> returns a merge outcome of svn_wc_merge_unchanged).
>>> This results in a lot of incorrect notifications with
>> merge-tracking -
>>> see http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2007-03/1157.shtml
>> But I'd argue
>>> it's incorrect regardless of merge-tracking and would like to
>>> apply the
>>> attached patch. I see no problems with this, but
>> Philip Martin's
>>> question in merge_file_changed()...
>>> In your example (in the mailing list archive link), the file is not
>>> updated by the merge, but the file's properties are.
>> Shouldn't there
>>> be a notification due to the properties being updated? Or are we
>>> trying to suppress those when it is the mergeinfo property?
>>> With the possible exception that we are trying to hide the
>> updates to
>>> mergeinfo properties, I'd have excpected to see a property update
>> For property merge we still get 'G' even if the WC already as
>> the same local change.
> I might be misunderstanding Mark, but I think he is referring only to
> If so this is somewhat of a separate issue. Currently we do treat the
> svn:mergeinfo prop as special and don't notify regarding changes to it
> (hmmm, not sure if this always true but I think it is ATM). I'm not
> sure if this was by design, I see nothing in the specs that indicates it
> was, perhaps Dan or Kamesh can speak to this? Regardless I think the
> current behavior is correct, svn:mergeinfo changes show up in status
> (they are after all properties), but I wouldn't want to see them in the
> output of svn merge since I see them more as meta-(meta?)-data on the
> merge rather than part of it.
Yes since r19954(erstwhile merge-tracking branch) this suppression seems
to be in place. Though I could not see the log message stating the same.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Wed Apr 4 16:35:17 2007