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

Meaning of "merge --ignore-ancestry" [was: Re-merge a change from own history - corrupts svn:mergeinfo]

From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:13:41 +0000

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
> 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?).


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

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.