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

Issue #3048 and r29189

From: Justin Erenkrantz <justin_at_erenkrantz.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 07:49:06 -0800


As I said when it was suggested (and was promptly ignored), I must
protest that the UI changes to the interactive conflict resolution to
support #3048 make the entire system useless.

First-off, case-sensitivity should simply not matter. The removal of
'd' and 't' options are incredibly short-sighted - this is not an
acceptable situation and certainly not for 1.5 to be 'not implemented'
if that is the plan. I don't believe the problem that was raised
(that the diff is not as optimal as it could be) is really a
legitimate problem. I think it's actually more useful to have the 'd'
and 't' be as they were - with (at best) new options to show a reduced
merge. I find it way more useful to show me what changed overall
since my update (ie base rev) *and* where the conflicts are - because
without what merged 'cleanly', it's not easy to understand the
conflicts! So, even if/when 'd' and 't' are implemented as described
in #3048, the default options are going to be not that helpful because
we're going to throw away the remaining merge information that *led*
to the conflict and we'll just get only part of what changed. This is
not enough information to be useful to me as a developer when I'm
evaluating the change.

I think we simply can produce a more intelligent interface than this. -- justin

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-02-27 16:49:26 CET

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.