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

Re: Stop creating mergeinfo on COPY (was: Problems reintegrating the issue-2843-dev branch)

From: Paul Burba <ptburba_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:11:58 -0500

On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Paul Burba <ptburba_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:01 AM, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 9:59 AM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
>>> Mark Phippard wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 7:10 PM, Paul Burba <ptburba_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Stopping all the WC-to-WC production of needless explicit mergeinfo
>>>>> would go a longggg way to avoiding this, but that doesn't help those
>>>>> (including us) with lots of historical subtree mergeinfo. More and
>>>>> more I think that copy and move (all, not just WC-to-WC) should never
>>>>> produce mergeinfo on the destination *unless* the source has it. It
>>>>> can't be worse than what we deal with now...
>>>> I propose we just do this ... now. Let's just rip this code out of WC
>>>> to WC copy. Do not create mergeinfo when copying stuff. Forget about
>>>> making it smarter, let's just stop doing it. The problems we have
>>>> created by doing this are far worse than the theoretical problems we
>>>> could prevent by getting it right.
>>>> Ripping this out will make our product better now and reduce user
>>>> frustration. If the theoretical problems turn into real problems and
>>>> if someone is motivated enough to put this code back then they can do
>>>> so in a way that gets it right.
>>>> Let's stop the madness. If this one feature had not been put into
>>>> 1.5, then most of the problems relating to mergeinfo handling we
>>>> complain about would not even exist.
>>> At the risk of having you show up on my doorstep in a few hours wielding a
>>> battle axe, I'd suggest:
>>> 1. making 'svn copy WC WC' be mergeinfo-ignorant,
>>> 2. having that type of invocation print a warning about the fact
>>> that mergeinfo wasn't honored, and
>>> 3. add -g as the flag to calculate mergeinfo *with full repository
>>> access*?
>> My only objection is that we have said this at least 100 times now. I
>> am saying lets do #1 .. today. If someone cares enough to do #2 and 3
>> it will get done.
> Nothing but +1s on #1, so I am going to do this, and soon, unless
> someone raises an objection.

Done r34184. The destination of a WC-to-WC copy/move no longer gets
explicit mergeinfo unless the source had it already.



To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-11-13 22:12:08 CET

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.