Re: [PATCH] Merge source and target must be related but different branches, v1

On 12/15/2011 07:53 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> This "sync merge from my own history" operation seems bogus. I notice
> that (without my patch) it merges changes from the future *and* records mergeinfo
> for them. Surely we didn't ever intend that?

Subversion has supported "sync merge from my own history" since before merge
was written. It's called "svn update". :-)

Seriously, I'm having trouble coming up a really solid use-case for
supporting this. You could never commit the results of that merge because
any changed files would necessarily be out of date. *Maybe* if you were
trying to build a custom branch with select changes, you might 'svn update
-rOLD_REV', selective merge changes from the future of the branch, and then
copy the whole thing elsewhere. But let's nip that in the bud, and suggest
instead that folks trying to do this update to HEAD, and selective
reverse-merge the revisions they *don't* want. At least that's a scenario
that's supportable and committable while still logically equivalent to the
former.

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand