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

Re: Tree conflicts - What's To Do?

From: Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 13:37:45 +0100

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 03:54:59AM +0100, Neels J. Hofmeyr wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote:
> > - Update/switch is going to be ugly because it doesn't update the
> > base. User will have to undo local mods, "resolved", "update" again,
> > then re-do local mods. I think.
> Won't "resolve" update to the new base?

Well, technically speaking, only "update" updates to the new base.
Revert would revert to whatever base "update" updated to last.

I'd expect "resolve" to copy the base over a working file for
--accept=base, which accepts the base version from before most
recent update, or --accept=theirs-full, which accepts the base
version obtained in most recent update. See
(section "Postponing conflict resolution").
Question: Doesn't this behaviour imply that there are already
mechanisms in place to store multiple text bases for a file?

There are rather complicated issues with tree conflicts and text
bases, see also:


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-11-18 13:37:55 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.