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

Re: issue 3899 (copying conflict victims)

From: Philip Martin <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 12:47:56 +0100

"Bert Huijben" <bert_at_qqmail.nl> writes:

>> I agree that the references to the A/f files should not exist. But I
>> think that that's just a symptom of the issue that a copy of a conflicted
>> item shouldn't be conflicted.
> Isn't that the same behavior as we had in 1.0-1.6: a copy is just a copy of
> the actual node in the working copy with metadata changed to track its
> history, without copying the conflict?

1.6 also copies the conflict, so the copied file shows up as conflicted.

> Any reason why we can't simply define: copy doesn't copy conflicts?
> (My guess is that we just copy conflicts now, because it was easier to just
> copy the db row)

You mean the copy would work, but the copied file would not be marked
conflicted? If this is a text file the conflict markers will be present
in the file, is it OK to lose the conflict status for such a file? Also
what if the copy is part of a move, should all the conflicts in a moved
tree disappear?

A related issue is copies of files in a changelist. At present the
copies will also appear in the changelist.

Received on 2011-05-27 13:48:37 CEST

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.