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

Merge not merging

From: matthew ford <matthew.ford_at_forward.com.au>
Date: 2005-01-24 05:07:13 CET

Hi again Ben,
I really appreciate your assistance. It is what keeps me going.

I have never used diff, but have quite happly used CVS merge and it worked
as ( I ) expected.

This is what I would like 'merge' to do for me (assuming the common case of
a common ancester)
If the file is in the branch:HEAD and was not in the trunk at the time the
branch was made add it to the trunk:WC if it does not exist. It it
exists in trunk:WC merge differences/conflicts line by line.If the file is
in the branch:HEAD and WAS in the trunk at the time the branch but has since
been deleted in the trunk:WC then add and mark as conflict.If the file is
deleted in the branch:HEAD and is still in the trunk:WC then mark as
conflict.If the files exist in both branch:HEAD and trunk:WC merge changes
and mark lines that conflict.How can I do this using subverion?Tried to
start withsvn diff svn://localhost/svnRepos/trunk
svn://localhost/svnRepos/branches/1but then was stuck as I don't have a
patch command on my machine and subversion does not supply one.If you can
advise on how to get this result it would be greatly
following comments deal with you the question you raised in your emailI
thought my second example was quite detailed, basically the branch and trunk
started out the same.
some changes were made to the branch and someone else made changes to the
Now I want to 'merge' the changes in my branch back into the trunk.
>> svn merge --ignore-ancestry svn://localhost/svnRepos/trunk
>> svn://localhost/svnRepos/branch
>> This command seems to copy branch to trunk Not what I expected.

>Like I said, it compares the trunk and branch. If the branch is just
>"trunk plus some changes", then the comparison generates a patch which
>only describes the extra changes. If you run the above command in a
>trunk working copy, the branch changes will be applied.
What I have is branch == trunk plus some changes and latest trunk = trunk
plus some changesCannot seem to get a conflict on the points where the
changes intersect.In the case above there also is no common ancester between
trunk and branch, but you shouldbe able to handle that?>What the command
really does is "compare two trees,
>generate a patch, and apply the patch to a working copy." It's a way
>of replicating changes from one place to another. But it's up to you
>to supply arguments which generate the correct patch. And it's not
>difficult to figure out.Why do I need to figure this out? If there is a
common ancester whycann't subversion figure it out for its self.If there is
no common ancester then that should be a unique case whichsubversion can
recognise.>You definitely would *not* want the merge command to compare the
>and branch together: that's the classic newbie mistake. See the four
>pargraphs here in the book:Well actually I do. To do this my hand I would
use BeyondCompare to comparethe trunk to the branch and move the changes
from the branch to the trunk.I had another look at the docs and comments
like"Again, notice that the commit log message very specifically mentions
the range of changes that was merged into the trunk. Always remember to do
this, because it's critical information you'll need later on. "fill me with
dred. I think subversion's merge needs to be made smarter.I don't really
want to have to keep track of my revision history.I expect subversion to do
that for me. That's why I am using subversion. (Please take this as a
constructive criticism) >>
>> P.S. I just had a call from my boss who rang to ask how to do a merge.
>> He cannot get it working either.

>I'm sorry you're frustrated, but making pronouncements that the
>software and docs are bad is not a way to make friends, nor are
>comments like the one above. This isn't a battle, there's no "us"
>versus "you all".In spite of your best efforts to assist me, (which I
really appreciate)I have been battling with subversion merger for the last
two days. As I said befor the 'User is always right' There are at leasttwo
users out here who don't think "the subversion" way. And since mybackground
is different from my boss', I suppect we are not the onlyones. Your comment
about "the classic newbie mistake" also suggeststhat we are not alone.How
can I encourage the subversion developers to modify the way merge operates
or is documentedso that newbie can just use it stright out of the box?OK
lets try again as before both branch and trunk have been change after
thebranch was created.C:\temp\svnTrunk>svn merge -r 13:HEAD
svn://localhost/svnRepos/branches/1C oldFileInTrunk.txtA
newInBranch.txtThis almost worked. Now I get a conflict on the
change<<<<<<< .workingThis file existed in trunk prior to branch b1 has
been modified in trunk=======This file existed in trunk prior to branch b1
has been modified in b1>>>>>>> .merge-right.r16but there is no report to
tell me that the trunk has deleted a file thatis in the branch and which the
branch may depend on.I can see why this is so from the command above, as the
command makes noreference to my current trunk. This is probabily the main
source of theproblems I have been having. I want merge to merge the
differences betweenthe current branch and the current trunk. I don't what to
have to carewhat merges I have preformed in the past or when the branch was
taken fromthe trunk. (see statement of need at the top of this email.)(Also
revert on the merged trunk did not remove the new file added from branchA
newInBranch.txtso in this regard revert did not revert.)matthew

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jan 24 05:09:46 2005

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

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