Re: [PATCH] really skip tree conflict victims

Quoting Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de>:

> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 01:33:38AM +0100, Stephen Butler wrote:
>> Hi tree conflict fans,
>>
>> I've been working on the skipping feature for a while now.

>> Probably of interest: I got rid of some marginal types of tree
>> conflicts, that are of no interest to update/switch. I allow
>> only 4 types:
>>
>> (edit:deleted)
>> (delete:edited)
>> (delete:deleted)
>> (add:added)
>
> Hey Steve,
>
> Which marginal types of tree conflicts did you get rid of?

(delete:obstructed) and (delete:missing)

> And what does "get rid of" mean exactly?

They won't be created during update/switch. An obstruction
is simply an error. A missing item (i.e., has an entry but
the actual kind is svn_node_none) is corrected by letting
update restore the item, IIRC.

Julian and I had a long email discussion about what we should
handle as tree conflicts and what we should leave as simple
errors. See the end of

   http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2008-11/0084.shtml

for the current 'svn resolve' plan. This late in the 1.6
cycle, we better keep it simple.

> Is the list above the list of conflicts were incoming
> modfications to the working copy are not made ("skipped"),
> or is it the complete list of conflicts we now detect
> during update/switch?

Those four are the complete list. They will all be skipped
consistently, as soon as I fix a couple of file callbacks.

Hasta mañana!

Steve

-- 
Stephen Butler | Software Developer
elego Software Solutions GmbH
Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25 | 13355 Berlin | Germany
fon: +49 30 2345 8696 | mobile: +49 163 25 45 015
fax: +49 30 2345 8695 | http://www.elegosoft.com
Geschäftsführer: Olaf Wagner | Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin
Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 77719 | USt-IdNr: DE163214194
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org