[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: [Subclipse-users] Prevent silent merges

From: Hughes, James <jhughes_at_linx.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:41:16 +0100

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miha Vitorovic [mailto:mvitorovic_at_nil.si]
> Sent: 11 February 2008 09:30
> To: users_at_subclipse.tigris.org
> Subject: Re: [Subclipse-users] Prevent silent merges
>
> "Mark Phippard" <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote on 09.02.2008 01:48:34:
>
> > On Feb 8, 2008 4:35 PM, Chris <shef31_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > We just had a disaster. Two people were working on the same file,
> making
> > > changes, and when they updated/committed, subversion did a silent
> merge
> > > of the changes. The cause a major bug which took an large
> amount of
> time
> > > to find and fix.
> > >
> > > This is obviously unacceptable. I haven't the words to
> express what
> > > a spectacularly bad design decision it was to enable
> silent merges.
> > >
> > > The correct way to handle it (and yes, I use the word "correct"
> > > deliberately) is to force a developer to review any conflicts
> manually.
> > >
> > > How can I shut down this silent merge behavior?
> >
> > I do not really understand what you are saying. If there were
> > conflicts then why was the merge silent? Conflicts have to be
> > resolved before you can commit.
>
> He is talking to about the fact that Subversion looks for
> conflict based on content (lines) not entire files. So if the
> coders were changing different parts of the same file,
> Subversion will silently merge the changes. It is the way
> Subversion works, Chris.
>

Presumably the two coders involved would have had to merge their changes
back in to the mainline - doing an update on the way. Subversion did
exactly as it says on the box - updated, commited. So one of the coders
should have been more careful when they updated to ensure that the
update didn't introduce problems. Whilst I accept that to some, this
behaviour may not be what they want, I cannot see an alternative (except
to ask for confirmation of any changes made during all update, and that
would be a real PITA almost all of the time).

Odd that it took a long time to find the problem - all the information
should have been there in the resource history.

James

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee.
Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on
the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may
constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to
this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you
have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender
immediately.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subclipse.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subclipse.tigris.org
Received on 2008-02-11 12:01:35 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subclipse Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.