Re: Update/switch with an existing tree-conflict for move-update
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 04:37:03PM +0000, Philip Martin wrote:
> not single-revision
> - the user cannot update to single-revision because the tree-conflict
> must be resolved first
> To get out of this situation I think we have to allow the user to update
> (or switch) the move source while the tree-conflict is present.
> I've started looking at libsvn_wc/update_editor.c to see how to
> implement this. I'm wondering if I should remove most (all?) of the
> skipping code and just leave the shadowed code.
I was thinking for 1.8 we could remove skip-handling only for nodes that
have a particular tree conflict flagged (incoming edit vs. local moved-away).
This way, we can allow updating a conflicted move source to single-rev and
prevent any other (unforeseen) side effects of removing the skip handling.
I am not sure what those side effects might be. I'd just like to be careful
about making gratuitous changes at this point in the release cycle.
However, if it is generally safe and simpler to not skip on update at
all, then let's do that.
Received on 2013-03-05 18:00:55 CET
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev