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

Re: Report mergeinfo-only changes less verbosely [was: [RFC] *Greatly*improve merge performance...]

From: David Glasser <glasser_at_davidglasser.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:23:50 -0700

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 8:09 AM, Geoff Rowell<geoff.rowell_at_varolii.com> wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote:
>> Geoff Rowell wrote:
>> > Aside from performance, I wouldn't have such a problem with
> distributed
>> > mergeinfo if it didn't tend to alarm my users. They try to merge a
> few
>> > files and Subversion reports a massive number of changes.
>> >
>> > A serious review of where and when mergeinfo property changes are
>> > reported is needed.
>>
>> We talked once about hiding mergeinfo-only changes from the user, and
>> that was rightly rejected. Did we talk about "sidelining" or
>> "summarising" their display?
>>
>> It seems clear now, with hindsight and lots of mergeinfo, that UIs,
> both
>> our "svn" CLI and GUIs like TortoiseSvn, should help the user to see
> the
>> significant changes without the clutter of mergeinfo-only changes.
>>
>> "svn status" could by default summarize all the mergeinfo-only changes
>> in one line at the end:
>>
>> [[[
>> $ svn status
>> M    myfile
>> M    dir/myfile2
>> 43 items with changes to mergeinfo are also present but not shown.
>> ]]]
>>
>> "svn commit" when generating a log message could list them separately:
>>
>> [[[
>>
>> --This line, and those below, will be ignored--
>>
>> M    myfile
>> MM   dir/myfile2
>>
>> The following items have only mergeinfo changes:
>>  M   .
>>  M   file1
>>  M   dir
>>  M   dir/file4
>>  M   dir/file5
>>  M   dir/file6
>> ...
>>  M   dir/file43
>> ]]]
>>
>> This would require modifications to the "status" and "commit"
>> notification methods, of course. And there are command-line
>> compatibility questions, but it's not a big deal to decide on a
> solution
>> to those.
>>
>> Worth doing?
>>
>> Where are the other places that should have this
> separation/summarising?
>>
>
> I'd also suggest modifying the output of "svn log -v".

That was my first thought as well. That does ~require a repository
format change, though.

--dave

-- 
glasser_at_davidglasser.net | langtonlabs.org | flickr.com/photos/glasser/
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2369944
Received on 2009-07-10 20:24:31 CEST

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