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

Re: Tree conflict merry-go-round on update/switch

From: Neels J Hofmeyr <neels_at_elego.de>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 02:44:00 +0100

Stefan Sperling wrote:
> In any case, having to move local changes somewhere else temporarily
> may turn out to be unavoidable.


> Probably slightly more intuitive, but really the best we can come up with?
> I'd argue that once you grok the fact that text-bases aren't updated
> when a tree conflict is flagged, this strategy is straightforward.
> The question then is: Why don't we just update the text-base again? :)
> (I honestly have forgotten the exact reason for this.)

Pretty much because no-one has implemented it yet. Julian has been saying a
couple of times now that it would be better to not break with the concept of
text and prop changes that *pull* all the changes, even if it's to a local
temporary file, and update the revisions and stuff.

I'm +1 on it myself, since it would get rid of both merry-go-rounds and
repository contacting upon revert in a consistent manner. Stefan, you sound
like you would agree.

One problem though:
With tree-conflicts with an incoming delete *on a file*, we would schedule
the file deleted and keep all local modifications to it in a temporary file.
How would we do that for directories? non-svn-cp the dir to a local
temporary directory? Determine all local mods in the dir and have local tmp
files for each mod found, outside the to-be-deleted dir? Run and save a diff
on the directory to a temporary file?


Received on 2008-11-26 02:44:31 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.