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

Re: branch tree-conflicts-notify

From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 02:31:35 +0100

On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 02:58 +0200, Neels J. Hofmeyr wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I'm quite glad that we're all moving in the same direction, but by now I'm
> thoroughly confused as to what is being done by whom, and what I should be
> doing next.
>
> I updated my branch wc but don't see most of the changes you talked about.
> Are you committing on trunk? Steve, I see you updated the branch to trunk.
> Are you trying to confuse me? ;)

I'm working on trunk. I'm regarding the "tree-conflicts-notify" branch
as yours alone.

> Maybe it would be good if we keep the others updated on what we were doing,
> as in post unfinished patches so that we don't do the exact same things in
> parallel. Btw, have you guys finished the other stuff you took?

OK, here (attached) is the "skip when conflicts occur during update"
patch that I'm working on.

> So, I'll take a look at merge notification, then. I'm afraid to change
> either of svn_wc_conflicted_p2() or update notification, because I fear you
> guys have patches floating for it already.

I need an updated (per-victim) version of svn_wc_conflicted_p2(). I keep
starting to do it, but then stop because I don't fully understand how
the current callers would need to change. Maybe we can keep the current
version (or the previous version "svn_wc_conflicted_p()") and just
introduce the new version alongside it.

My patch attached includes a local function "conflicted_p3()" that does
pretty much what I want the new public function to do.

This patch also includes returning the new conflict (if any) from the
function check_tree_conflict, so that the calling code can generate its
notification and skip further edits. I believe you needed that. How
about you commit that part of my patch to trunk - or, if you prefer, I
will in the morning - with all callers just passing NULL for that output
parameter.

> Am I being cranky? ;)

No, you're right that it's getting confusing. I'm feeling it too. I
don't know whether to just commit some partial updates or if that would
get in your way.

One thing I was about to commit was removing the per-parent
notifications from "merge". Here's a patch for that as well. It seems a
bit negative to just delete that notification without adding per-victim,
but might be a useful start. Again, feel free to commit if you like.

Have a good session tonight.

- Julian

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org

Received on 2008-10-24 03:32:10 CEST

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