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

Re: [PATCH] Add option to resolve conflicts by selecting a specific file (Issue 2784)

From: Eric Gillespie <epg_at_pretzelnet.org>
Date: 2007-06-08 20:17:25 CEST

"Jeremy Whitlock" <jcscoobyrs@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi All,
> I think I know why there is a slight verbiage disagreement. When
> you create a conflict as part of an update/switch, the naming
> convention is:
> .rOLD, .rNEW and .mine
> When you create a conflict as part of a merge, the naming convention is:
> .merge-left.rOLD, .merge-right.rNEW and .working

Well, crap. I didn't realize we had this inconsistency out
there. And i bet OLD and NEW are backwards when i'm back-dating
(e.g. at r37 and svn up -r30). Sigh.

So, why don't we accept both? --accept=left == --accept=old and
--accept=right == --accept=new and the svn_accept_t values can
stay left/right, since that's what we really have in all cases anyway.

Thanks, Jeremy, for sticking with what originally looked like
such a simple task ;->.

Eric Gillespie <*> epg@pretzelnet.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jun 8 20:17:34 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.