Greg Stein wrote:
> Would "%s@%ld and %s@%ld must have a common ancestor" be easier to
> The term "ancestrally related" seems a bit complicated for translation
Your suggestion is a better message, I agree.
The present error code and error message exactly duplicate one that is already used in 'reintegrate'. As this is in the library, the message is perhaps less important than the error code. We can tweak the message, but perhaps we should also make it possible for the caller to distinguish this case, by using a different error code such as 'SVN_ERR_CLIENT_UNRELATED_RESOURCES' (which is already for cases such as source and target being in different repositories), or even a new one.
Stefan K or other GUI people, do you have an opinion on this?
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:12 PM, <julianfoad_at_apache.org> wrote:
>> Author: julianfoad
>> Date: Mon Jun 3 22:12:41 2013
>> New Revision: 1489203
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1489203
>> * subversion/libsvn_client/merge.c
>> (find_automatic_merge): Error instead of crashing if source branch is not
>> related to target branch.
>> Found by: steveking
>> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client/merge.c
>> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client/merge.c (original)
>> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client/merge.c Mon Jun 3 22:12:41
>> @@ -12307,6 +12307,12 @@ find_automatic_merge(svn_client__pathrev
>> &s_t->yca, s_t->source, &s_t->target->loc,
>> ctx, result_pool, result_pool));
>> + if (! s_t->yca)
>> + return svn_error_createf(SVN_ERR_CLIENT_NOT_READY_TO_MERGE, NULL,
>> + _("'%s@%ld' must be ancestrally
> related to "
>> + "'%s@%ld'"),
>> + s_t->source->url,
>> + s_t->target->loc.url,
>> /* Find the latest revision of A synced to B and the latest
>> * revision of B synced to A.
Received on 2013-06-04 17:53:01 CEST