"Mark Phippard" <markphip@gmail.com> writes:
> > And I'd still like to see if I can finish what I've been calling 'deep
> > conflicts': rather than have a merge abort when it tries to patch a
> > conflicted file, I'd like the merge to keep going, and have the file's
> > wc metadata remember the missing-revision-ranges it needs. It would
> > be a special sort of conflict not resolvable via 'svn resolved', but
> > only by allowing 'svn merge' to apply the missing ranges.
>
> I think these would be nice to have, but I suspect we are at the point
> where we have to start thinking about a 1.6 release for things like
> this. Especially since it involves UI which always has some bikeshed
This feature is a hard requirement for some organizations, but
not all, and probably not even most. It also seems to be on the
other side of a clean break, i.e. we can easily defer it to 1.6
(which I'd like to see as a smaller, polishing release, following
1.5 by no more than 6 months). And it's probably time we start
identifying the features that we should push back to 1.6.
I'm not arguing against having it in 1.5, but as one of the
biggest (if not the biggest) agitators for this feature, I
thought I should go on the record as being OK with deferral.
--
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 Tue Sep 4 23:46:42 2007