Karl Fogel wrote:
>>Scenario 1: merge a single change from the history of a particular
>>file; request no merge-tracking; request no textual change to be made
>>if it conflicts.
[...]
>>$ svn merge --ignore-ancestry --accept=mine-full -c26169
>>subversion/tests/cmdline/merge_tests.py
>>subversion/tests/cmdline/merge_tests.py
[...]
> I certainly agree there is a bug here, given that svn:mergeinfo is being
> corrupted. However, I'm not sure --ignore-ancestry does what you think
> it does. Its help just says:
>
> --ignore-ancestry : ignore ancestry when calculating merges
>
> Nothing there about not *recording* mergeinfo for this 'merge' command;
> rather, it's talking about how it selects which changes to merge.
>
> What you're thinking of would be a sort of opposite of the --record-only
> flag: a '--no-record' flag, which AFAIK we don't have (should we?).
Karl,
My recent thread "[PATCH] Help text improvements for 'svn merge'" includes the
following clarification to the help text:
> " NOTE: Subversion will only record metadata to track the merge\n"
> " if the two sources are on the same line of history -- if the\n"
> " first source is an ancestor of the second, or vice-versa. This is\n"
> " guaranteed to be the case when using the third form listed above.\n"
> + " The --ignore-ancestry option overrides this, forcing Subversion to\n"
> + " regard the sources as unrelated and not to track the merge.\n"),
-------------------------------------------^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is based on my understanding after talking with pburba and cmpilato.
- Julian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-03-27 21:14:04 CET