On 11/23/06, pobox@verysmall.org <pobox@verysmall.org> wrote:
> Mark Phippard wrote:
> > I then have some customization branches. These have different
> > variations to the code on trunk and just need to be kept in synch with
> > trunk. svnmerge would make this easier, but I do not find the manual
> > process that difficult. I just record in my commit the revisions I
> > merged, and the next time I need to do it, I just find that message,
> > which contains the last revisions I merged, and then merge the ones
> > since then.
>
> OK So basically you do it the 'normal' way.
>
> What about this approach -
>
> If I use the Compare function I discover the differences. Then I click
> on the files one by one and do the 'copy right to left' think. Then I
> commit.
>
> This is not a real 'merge' - it is like manually typing the same thing
> into the other branch. But it results in what we need - HEAD of both
> branches (or branch and trunk) is in sync.
>
> Is this very illegal and does it hide dangers?
All I can think to say is "why would you want to do it this way?".
SVN merge is easy, just take the time to learn it, you will more than
recoup the time spent.
To answer your question, I think the only danger is in human error.
Merge is just a way of automating someone making the same change in
multiple places. If you want to do it manually, by all means, go
ahead and do it.
I cannot really tell any more if you are using svnmerge or not, but if
you are, then this would also have the same problems as doing a merge
from Subclipse. By not using svnmerge to bring in the change, you are
not updating the svnmerge metadata to contain this information.
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subclipse.tigris.org
Received on Thu Nov 23 23:38:03 2006