Re: spurious mergeinfo property created on copy?

On Tue, 09 Oct 2007, Mark Phippard wrote:

> On 10/9/07, Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-svn-dev@farside.org.uk> wrote:
...
> > Even if this does turn out expected, it seems like a bad idea. There's
> > no reason we should be creating empty-valued properties willy-nilly like
> > this.
>
> I thought that at first too, but then I remembered there was a reason
> that Dan sets this empty property. It has significance in the context
> of merge tracking. I think if we do not set the property then the
> mergeinfo just becomes inherited from some parent which could be
> completely incorrect.

This is exactly the reason -- no mergeinfo is better that wrong mergeinfo.

> This break the inheritance and causes the merge
> engine to look at this item separate from the inherited mergeinfo.
>
> The best solution is ultimately to find a way to set the mergeinfo
> without requiring the server connection. There are several workable
> ideas, but none of them can be implemented very quickly.

Indeed (see my other post on this thread). I'm hopeful to take
another look at that after returning from SubConf.