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

RE: Should 1.5.6 merge help be updated?

From: Bert Huijben <rhuijben_at_sharpsvn.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 20:57:16 +0100

> -----Original Message-----
> From: anatoly techtonik [mailto:techtonik_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 8:46 PM
> To: dev_at_subversion.tigris.org
> Subject: Should 1.5.6 merge help be updated?
>
> "merge: Apply the differences between two sources to a working copy
> path.
> usage:
> ...
> 3. merge [-c M[,N...] | -r N:M ...] SOURCE[@REV] [WCPATH]
>
> ...
>
> 3. In the third form, SOURCE can be either a URL or a working copy
> path (in which case its corresponding URL is used). SOURCE (in
> revision REV) is compared as it existed between revisions N and M
> for each revision range provided. If REV is not specified, HEAD
> is assumed. '-c M' is equivalent to '-r <M-1>:M', and '-c -M'
> does the reverse: '-r M:<M-1>'. If no revision ranges are
> specified, the default range of 0:REV is used. Multiple '-c'
> and/or '-r' instances may be specified, and mixing of forward
> and reverse ranges is allowed."
>
> Should there be a clarification that If no revision ranges are
> specified, the default range is not "0:REV", but "BRANCH-POINT:REV"
> and only if there is no BRANCH-POINT, 0:REV is used?

Subversion really uses 0:REV internally, but because the revisions
0:{BRANCH-ORIGIN} are already part of the implicit history of the branch
these versions are automatically excluded when calculating what to merge,
just like other already merged ranges.

        Bert

------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1258033
Received on 2009-03-02 20:57:44 CET

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