Re: tree conflicts with replace

On Thu, 2009-08-13, Neels Janosch Hofmeyr wrote:
> Hi tree-conflicts folks,
>
> the irony, we were just discussing atomic replace, when a tree-conflict
> failure with replaces in it pops up.

Hi Neels.

There are several tree-conflict deficiencies and bugs such as this one
that I'd like to take a look at some time, but I've been doing other
things instead.

[...]
> [[[
> $ svn revert
> Reverted 'alpha'
> $ svn st
> ? alpha
> ]]]
>
> --> Wait, the local changes were both a "delete" and an "add". Only the
> "add" got reverted. Is that intended? BASE seems to be in-between the atomic
> replace (sorry for the language). That's bad.

That's got to be the root of this problem. Sounds like a simple bug. The
wierdness that follows it is not surprising, if it leaves the WC in a
bad state.

[...]
> Am I saddling the horse the right way here?

All you said about text conflicts etc. sounds like good ideas for
improvement.

- Julian

------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2383093
Received on 2009-08-13 03:03:14 CEST