On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 03:55:00PM -0400, Bob Archer wrote:
> > I would like to propose to add a way to abort updates in case of an conflict.
> > This could be done by adding e.g. an abort command to the interactive
> > conflict resolution. This should transform the working copy to the situation
> > before the update that resulted in an conflict happend.
> > The reason I would like to have this is because on a project I work on it
> > regularly happens that one committer accidently reverts changes made by
> > other that result in an conflict. In this case usually the easiest way to fix this is
> > to (partially) revert the conflicting commit and then update. Therefore it
> > would be nice to be able to abort an update that results in a conflict, wait for
> > the other commiter to revert the conflicting commit and update then.
> Are you sharing working copies? I'm pretty sure that is not a supported use case for subversion... so requesting something change due to a non-supported use case isn't going to happen.
No. The problem results from vim failing to reload a changed document
after svn up. E.g.:
Joe opens foo.tex with revision 1
Jane commits revision 2 of foo.tex
Joe updates foo.tex, but vim fails to notice.
Joe changes something unrelated to Jane's commit and saves foo.tex in
Joe commits revision 3 of foo.tex, which contains the contents of
revision 1 in the section Jane is working on.
Jane changes something in her section.
Jane updates to revision 3, but this results in a conflict.
What I would like to have is that Jane can now abort the update and ask
Joe to fix the repository contents with another commit that reverts the
changes from revision 3 so that Jane can cleanly update after Joe
commited the clean revision 4.
Received on 2011-08-09 22:04:14 CEST