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

RE: Re: [BIKESHED] Merge notification verb choices

From: Paul Burba <pburba_at_collab.net>
Date: 2007-09-18 00:57:23 CEST

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Rall [mailto:dlr@collab.net]
> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 3:57 PM
> To: Blair Zajac
> Cc: Michael Pilato; Subversion Developers
> Subject: Re: [BIKESHED] Merge notification verb choices
>
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2007, Blair Zajac wrote:
>
> > C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> > >In IRC, Dan explained to me that when designing the merge
> > >notifications, especially for single-revision merge
> ranges, we needed
> > >a way to distinguish between "merge -c M" and "merge -c
> -M". We use
> > >"merging" to describe most merges, but for the reverse
> merge case, we
> > >decided to go with "undoing", as in:
> > >
> > > Undoing r45
> > >
> > >I take issue with this verb because to "undo" implies that
> something
> > >must have first been done, and frankly our client code doesn't
> > >actually have sufficient awareness to make that claim. I can run
> > >'svn merge -c REV' on any arbitrary source and revision and apply
> > >that to any arbitrary location, and while it may conflict
> like crazy,
> > >the operation will still be attempted.
> > > Does this mean I "undid" that change? Not hardly.
> > >
> > >Mark suggested "removing", but it has the same
> shortcomings. As does
> > >"Un-merging", or any number of verbs which claim to be
> inverting the
> > >results of some presumedly previously performed action.
> > >
> > >I suggest that we conservatively call a reverse-merge what it is:
> > >
> > > Reverse-merging r45
> >
> > +1 on reverse-merging.
> >
> > Undo'ing could imply to somebody that the revision is
> removed from the
> > repository, which of course, it isn't. So reverse-merge is
> the best choice.
>
> I changed it as suggested in r26639.
>
> We still need to either suppress this notification, or change
> its text, for merges whose left and right sides aren't at the
> same URL (e.g. for 'svn merge url1@revX url2@revY .').

We discussed this a bit on IRC and FWIW I'd like to see a generic
notification in the two-URL case to keep it somewhat consistent with the
single-URL case. Maybe something like:

" --- Merging difference between unrelated URLs"

Paul

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Sep 18 01:01:05 2007

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