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

Re: HEADS UP: Damaged mergeinfo in our history; likely pain in our future.

From: Paul Burba <ptburba_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 00:10:20 -0500

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Paul Burba <ptburba_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Paul Burba <ptburba_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I fixed svn_mergeinfo_parse(), svn_mergeinfo_to_string(),
>> svn_mergeinfo__catalog_to_formatted_string(), and
>> svn_mergeinfo__to_formatted_string(), so that any time we create
>> svn_mergeinfo_t from a string or vice-versa, we tolerate relative
>> paths in the input, but create absolute paths in the output.  This
>> solves the original problem Mike saw with his sync merges...
>>
>>>>  Properties on '.':
>>>>   svn:mergeinfo
>>>>     /subversion/trunk:879653-880579
>>>>     subversion/trunk:880580-880583
>>>
>>> FWIW, we already have this problem on our 1.6.x branch.
>>
>> ...but in cases like this branch, it actually makes things worse,
>> because when the second "identical" key/val is parsed, it overwrites
>> the first one, so we lose mergeinfo during merges and get partial
>> (i.e. wrong) answers to svn mergeinfo queries.  We should be able to
>> simply merge the results for identical keys (I'll look at that
>> tomorrow).  Other than that I don't see any other problems, beyond
>> what I already mentioned regarding svn_mergeinfo_diff (which isn't
>> much of a problem).
>>
>> Paul
>
> Fixed all the aforementioned problems (e.g. svn mergeinfo and svn
> merge bustage) in r889840.  Will nominate for backport later tonight.

Done. Please review if you have a chance.
Received on 2009-12-12 06:10:53 CET

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.