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

RE: Do we better tolerate obstructed updates?

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl>
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 21:32:29 +0200

> -----Original Message-----
> From: hyrum_at_hyrumwright.org [mailto:hyrum_at_hyrumwright.org] On Behalf Of
> Hyrum K. Wright
> Sent: woensdag 7 juli 2010 6:03
> To: Subversion Development
> Subject: Do we better tolerate obstructed updates?
>
> The bindings tests are currently failing, and there appear to be two
> root causes. One of them, causing test failures in both JavaHL and
> swig-rb, is that the tests expect an error with an operation that used
> to cause an obstruction, such as update, but those errors are no
> longer being returned. Has something changed recently which allows us
> to better tolerate obstructions?

In preparation of making this 1.6.x error into obstruction conflicts later,
we started skipping obstructing files, recording that by adding a
not-present marker in BASE_NODE (and maybe some tree conflict in some cases,
but I don't know about that part?).

When we have the central db+pristine store ready we can switch to just
continuing the BASE_NODE update, while adding an obstruction conflict to
record that the in-wc file is not the real wc-file.

        Bert
>
> -Hyrum
Received on 2010-07-07 21:33:50 CEST

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