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

Re: svn_wc_conflict_result_choose_repos found dangerous?

From: Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman_at_red-bean.com>
Date: 2007-07-18 17:59:39 CEST

On 7/18/07, Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman@red-bean.com> wrote:
> On 7/18/07, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Aren't they just 2 different use-cases ('select-theirs-entirely' or
> > 'select-theirs-hunk-wise')?
>
> I don't know of any VC system that offers both of these options. I've
> only seen users concerned about resolving conflicted hunks; I can't
> imagine a situation where the user would want to resolve conflicted
> hunks *and* toss out other local edits at the same time.

Hm, allow me to reverse my position here; a few coworkers just
lectured me that the idea of "select-theirs-hunk-wise" is utterly
insane, because it's essentially unpredictable. Some of your edits
are conflicting, some are not; why would a user select an option that
means "throw away some of my edits, but not others", when he has no
real idea which edits are about to be tossed? The result has a
non-deterministic feel to it. By selecting the entire file from the
repository, at least you're getting a known good state -- something
syntactically and semantically reasonable -- and you know exactly
which local edits are being discarded (all of them).

They're telling me that perforce's (t)heirs option really does choose
the whole file, not just certain random hunks.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jul 18 17:58:49 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.