Lübbe Onken | RA Consulting wrote:
> Sorry for the late reply, but yesterday was *very* busy and today
> isn't any better.
I know the feeling :)
>> So: what's different about the branch you don't see in the graph?
>> Can you check the log of the revisions where the branches got
>> created and removed? Is there something different in the lower pane
>> of the log dialog for those revisions? Maybe the 'copyfrom' column
>> is missing in the branch you don't see?
> It's not missing, but different. The branch that is visible in the
> graph for trunk has a copyfrom url=/trunk. The branches that are not
> visible have a copyfrom url=/trunk/subproject.
That's ok. The revision graph only shows entries if the copyfrom url
matches. Otherwise the graph would get *really* crowded: imagine someone
renaming a subfolder of trunk with thousands of files and folders in it:
the graph would show a node for *every* item of that renamed subfolder.
> So this is probably a PEBKAC. If I want to see the revgraph for
> subproject, I have to show the graph for /trunk/subproject and not
> for /trunk right? Somehow I was thinking that showing the graph for
> /trunk would show me all branches created below trunk.
Yes, correct. To see the graph for subproject, you have to start the
graph on the subproject, not trunk.
> But, and that's one thing I don't understand. I created a refactoring
> branch from subproject, so I have /branches/subrefactoring which was
> copied from /trunk/subproject in r3512 and deleted in r3567.
> I open the repository browser in revision 3550, at which time
> /branches/subrefactoring exists.
> If I show the graph for trunk, I don't see the existence of
> /branches/subrefactoring If I show the graph for trunk/subproject, I
> see the existence of /branches/subrefactoring I think I understood
> that now, because the copyfrom url has to match.
> If I show the graph for branches/otherbranch, I don't see the
> existence of /branches/subrefactoring If I show the graph for
> branches/subrefactoring , I see the existence of
> /branches/subrefactoring and of other temporary and still existing
> branches. (See attachment) Why that? Is this because they share the
> same copyfrom url (trunk/subproject)? Is this correct behaviour?
That's correct behavior. The graph shows all copies of a specific
path/url through time. If you show the graph for
branches/subrefactoring, it will show you all copies for that url. Now,
if you go back in time for that url, you discover that it was created
sometime from e.g. /trunk/subproject. That means from that revision on
backwards, the url was 'named' differently. The graph then uses that
renamed url to analyze further (even forward in time).
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
\ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
/_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.net
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Wed Dec 5 10:48:03 2007