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

Re: tree conflicts: incoming delete of a folder

From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 15:24:04 +0000

Neels J Hofmeyr wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-01-19, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote:
> >> Obviously we want to enforce this rule:
> >>
> >> 1. An incoming delete of a folder is a tree-conflict when it would delete a
> >> folder structure that is different from what was originally deleted.
[...]

> > The danger of rule 2 and the advantage of rule 1 comes when we try to
> > apply multiple changes in sequence. We should always strive to make it
> > possible to do one merge after another (or one update after another),
> > and the end result of the sequence should be the same as if we just did
> > a single merge (or update) that brought in both of the changes at the
> > same time.
>
> Fair point! I agree there.
> So as soon as diff_wc_url-summarize is up to checking for rule 1, we can
> drop rule 2.
>
> Rule 1 does not include differences in history, right? Obviously it doesn't,
> just making sure. It does include differences in content and in props.

Correct.

- Julian
Received on 2010-01-22 16:24:45 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.