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

ignoring tree-conflicts during merge

From: Neels Janosch Hofmeyr <neels_at_elego.de>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 23:23:55 +0200

Hi guys,

I'd like to renew an old question, since I can't find any final conclusion
to it: merge, --force and tree-conflicts detection. ... "?"


Are we still positive that skipping tree-conflicts detection during merge
with --force is no good?

And, that a way to skip TC detection during merge is yet a missing feature?
(does anyone remember an issue for this? couldn't find any.)

I've also got this snippet from notes/tree-conflicts/detection.txt:


During an update or switch, we skip tree conflict detection if the
user has provided the '--force' option. This allows an interrupted
update to continue (see the use case 1 example below). This is in
addition to the already-existing behavior: with '--force', update or
switch will tolerate an obstruction of the same type as the item added
at that path by the operation.

During a merge, we skip tree conflict detection if the record_only
field of the merge-command baton is TRUE. A record-only merge
operation updates mergeinfo without touching files.


Thanks for any comments.


Received on 2009-06-16 23:24:58 CEST

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.