Re: Subversion merge creates bogus tree conflicts
From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:30:11 +0000 (GMT)
David Moon wrote:
> On Jan 15, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
Yup, this whole area needs better documentation and even more importantly better design and implementation. Anybody reading this who might be able to help in any way, please get in touch!
>> Two adds of different names to the same directory do not conflict. The
OK, feedback taken.
> Hmm, I wonder if the directory not existing on the target means this is actually
It's very complex -- in general (different merge scenarios) the delete might have been a conscious user action committed in the target branch, and might be a move away rather than a plain delete, since svn still lacks move tracking. We can't assume that just recreating the dir is the right thing, although it should be offered as an option in the conflict resolver.
> But then, what does the "local add, incoming add upon merge" error
It means the thing (at a specific path) didn't exist in the "old" side of the incoming change, and is being added by the incoming change of the merge, and also exists in the target already (apparently having been "added" since it wasn't present in the assumed common ancestor).
> Again, I don't need a solution myself. I only reported this as a way of
Thank you; I do appreciate it takes time and effort to do so, and it is valuable to us.
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.