On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:49:58AM -0500, Paul Burba wrote:
> A quick question on how we'd prefer reintegrate merges to work:
> ~~~~~
>
> Use Case 1:
>
> Copy 'trunk_at_1' to 'branch' in r2
> Make a change to 'trunk' in r3
> Make a change to 'branch' in r4
> Update the 'trunk' WC to r4
>
> Then try to reintegrate 'branch' to 'trunk'. Should this:
>
> A) Fail and require that r3 be merged from 'trunk' to 'branch' before
> reintegrate will work.
>
> or
>
> B) Merge the diff between 'trunk' and 'branch's youngest common
> ancestor and 'branch_at_r4', i.e. TRUNK_URL_at_1 BRANCH_URL_at_4 to 'trunk'.
>
> The current behavior is 'B'. Note that there is the possibility of a
> conflict between r3 and r4.
In my opinion, 'B' is fine.
Users should double check the merge result when using releases that
do not have tree conflict handling -- i.e. all current releases, and
possibly 1.6, depending on whether that will contain tree conflict
handling or not.
Once tree conflict handling is released, we will be flagging most
of the possible conflicts during this merge correctly.
> ~~~~~
>
> Use Case 2:
>
> Copy 'trunk_at_1' to 'branch' in r2
> Make a change to 'trunk' in r3
> Update the 'trunk' WC to r3
>
> Then try to reintegrate 'branch' to 'trunk'. Should this:
>
> A) Fail and require that r3 be merged from 'trunk' to 'branch' before
> reintegrate will work.
>
> or
>
> B) Fail with a message indicating that there is nothing to reintegrate
> or
>
> C) Actually do the merge of TRUNK_URL_at_1 BRANCH_URL_at_3 to 'trunk'. This
> is obviously a no-op diff, but mergeinfo of '/branch:2-3' would be set
> on 'trunk'.
>
> The current behavior is 'C'.
What about behaviour 'D' == 'C' + warning message indicting that there
was nothing to reintegrate?
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 18:50:52 CET