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

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [Subclipse-users] Branch merge issues

From: Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 13:58:37 -0400

I have posted release 1.9.0 of the CollabNet Desktop to the
"dev-builds" update site. Here are the URL's:

Eclipse 3.3: http://downloads.open.collab.net/eclipse/dev-builds/e3.3
Eclipse 3.4: http://downloads.open.collab.net/eclipse/dev-builds/e3.4

The 3.4 site should work for Eclipse 3.5

Please give it a try and see if it improves the performance of the
multi-project merge. It'd be great if you could post comments here:

http://desktop-eclipse.open.collab.net/ds/viewForumSummary.do?dsForumId=779

Mark

On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Mark Phippard<markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Just an fyi ... we have made some fixes here that should speed this up
> for you.  I'll be posting a new build later for you to try.  I'll post
> again when it is available.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 3:49 AM, Stephen Colebourne<scolebourne_at_joda.org> wrote:
>>> The command I'd be looking for here is:
>>>
>>> svn mergeinfo --show-revs=eligible http://repo/svn/base/trunk@HEAD
>>> http://repo/svn/base
>>>  /branches/1.0_at_HEAD
>>>
>>> Note how eclipseprojecta was removed from both.  This is the command
>>> we'd execute to get the eligible revisions to merge for all projects.
>>
>> Here are the results for the svn mergeinfo on the command line:
>>
>> /trunk to /branches/branch1 - quick, correct info for all projects
>>
>> /trunk/project to /branches/branch1/project - quick, correct info for one project
>>
>> /trunk/project to /branches/branch1 - slower, wrong as expected (all revisions since branch created)
>>
>> /trunk to /branches/branch1/project - quick, very slow (~2 minutes), wrong as expected (all revisions from rv1)
>>
>> Based on this, I really believe that the evidence points to Subclipse issuing the wrong command (the fourth one above). But why for me and not for you? Perhaps you could create a build with extra logging?
>>
>> Also I don't see why you wouldn't issue the svn mergeinfo at the level of each of the projects, and union the set of returned revision numbers, as doing it at the base level returns rv numbers that don't affect the selected projects.
>>
>> Stephen
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> http://subclipse.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1047&dsMessageId=2356065
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subclipse.tigris.org].
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
>
> Mark Phippard
> http://markphip.blogspot.com/
>

-- 
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
------------------------------------------------------
http://subclipse.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1047&dsMessageId=2358848
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subclipse.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-06-02 19:58:51 CEST

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.