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

Help on 1.6-blocker #3334 - tree conflicts in update

From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:48:43 +0000

Blocker:
>
> * #3334: Tree conflicts "merry-go-round" about update updating the base.
> Julian Foad is working on this. Done for when victim is a file, still
> doing for when victim is a directory. [julianfoad]
> See: <http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1019712>.

I'm struggling with this and could use some help. I have rather little
time to look at it these days.

On the issue-3334-dirs branch, the remaining problem is "just" a matter
of scheduling a directory tree to be re-added as a copy of what it was
before.

The function "schedule_existing_item_for_re_add()" tries to do this, but
doesn't get the result quite right.

On the branch I added a new "test" (update_tests.py 53). This "test"
doesn't actually test anything, but just runs the tree-conflict
scenario, and also runs a manual schedule-as-re-add command sequence, so
that we can (manually) compare the resulting "entries" files.

In test 53, the tree conflict victim is directory A/ and A's THIS_DIR
entry needs a "revision" of 1, but it gets a revision of 2. That's all
that is wrong with its THIS_DIR entry. There is nothing wrong with its
children, I think. The only other problem is A's entry in its parent,
which gets several fields wrong (different from the "manual copy" WC).

Please could someone have a look at the differences between the entries
files in test 53's two WCs, and see how to make
"schedule_existing_item_for_re_add()" create that state.

- Julian

------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1064369
Received on 2009-01-28 21:49:04 CET

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