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

Re: merge tracking use cases

From: David Glasser <glasser_at_davidglasser.net>
Date: 2007-12-01 04:29:37 CET

On Nov 30, 2007 4:02 PM, Daniel Rall <dlr@collab.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Mark Phippard wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 2007 5:59 PM, David Glasser <glasser@davidglasser.net> wrote:

> > > Note that I don't see anything there that reminds me of #2897, (Am I
> > > missing something?)
> >
> > I was updating Jack Repenning on all of this to get his take. He said
> > that #2897 is the most common use case. It is what everyone that uses
> > ClearCase UCM does (in fact it is officially called the "Standard Use
> > Model") and if Subversion does not have that feature then it does not
> > have merge tracking.
> >
> > I cannot really disagree. I raised this back in June and I've raised
> > it several times since then. It is hard to argue that we have
> > advanced the bar if a user cannot merge a branch back to trunk.
> Issue #2897 is a core part of the Repeated Merge use case. Issue
> #2837 is coupled (almost the same), but the plan was to defer that
> part for post-1.5.

Is "merge to feature branch" and "merge from feature branch" really
the same operation though?

The way I see it, the first is saying "take revisions that represent
development on trunk and move them to the feature branch; I will need
to resolve conflicts (both textual and semantic)".

The second is saying "my feature branch right now is exactly what
trunk ought to be. Make trunk look like my feature branch does now".

(Another way of looking at it is: the first is saying "integrate
changes from the trunk line of development into the feature line of
development"; the second is saying "this thing we used to call the
'feature line' should now be called the 'trunk line'".)

Today's merge-tracking achieves the first goal well. The operation
accomplished by 2-URL merge today achieves the second goal. Now, the
UI for 2-URL merge in the feature-branch-back-to-trunk case is
frustrating. But I think all the information exists to calculate the
correct revs and such for the 2-URL merge operation, *today*. Perhaps
all we need is a better UI around "merge-back-to-trunk", powered by
2-URL merge.


David Glasser | glasser_at_davidglasser.net | http://www.davidglasser.net/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Dec 1 04:29:48 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.