Re: Merge Tracking Auditing - SoC
Mark Phippard wrote:
> On 4/23/07, Hyrum K. Wright <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>> > Hello all.
>> > As many of you know, the approval for Summer of Code projects came last
>> > week, and I've received funding to work on the auditing aspect of merge
>> > tracking
>> > I'm excited to get going on the project.
>> > Over the next month, I'd like to finalize the functional spec at the
>> > above URL. I would appreciate it if people could take a look at it and
>> > suggest any changes. The pending questions in the spec, with varying
>> > degrees of relevancy, are:
>> > * How will --merge-sensitive behave for commits which remove merge info
>> > (e.g. reverts)?
>> > * In the case of svn log, would the user be better served if we just
>> > included the original revision logs in line with the logs (i.e., no
>> > special indentation, etc.)?
>> > * What about svn ls --verbose, which also shows revisions and
>> We've resolved these questions, but added one more:
>> * What happens when svn status --show-updates has multiple original
> I think it should be handled the same as info and ls, which I believe
> means no changes to current behavior.
That sounds reasonable. If there are not dissenting opinions, I'll add
it to the spec.
Received on Tue Apr 24 21:53:54 2007
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev