Karl Fogel wrote:
> Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com> writes:
>>So is the "force" argument appropriate for this API? It seems to me
>>that it is redundant, and certainly it shouldn't be there if that's
>>true.
>
> I think you're right, though a merge could result in
> formerly-versioned things in the target becoming unversioned (because
> they've been removed on the branch). There's no need to protect that
> with a flag, though -- it's not dangerous, because unversioning
> something won't cause the working file to be removed, and we already
> know it's not modified, so we're not losing a diff.
>
[...]
>>- * Perform a reintegration merge of @a source into @target_wc_path.
>>+ * Perform a reintegration merge of @a source at @a peg_revision
>>+ * into @target_wc_path.
>
> +1
So I'll commit the attached patch for these two fixes, and propose it for
back-port to 1.5, if no objections. (It doesn't tweak the corresponding Java
API to match, so that will need updating separately. Does that need to be done
before back-port?)
- Julian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-02-28 23:00:09 CET