Re: svn merge on branches containing moved files/directories

Scott Palmer <scott.palmer@2connected.org> wrote:

> I can see why subversion would go ahead with scheduling the delete
> because no information will be permanently lost in this case. The
> problem is that I can imagine some cases where you would want the
> delete to silently go through because the changes in the destination
> branch are no longer relevant if that entire file is no longer needed,
> and yet I can see the other side, where the changes should not be wiped
> out by deleting the file because the changes are not part of what the
> original branch was trying to undo by the delete.

Huh? I don't see how this is any different from textual conflicts
within a single file. If one developer deletes a section of code in a
file, and another developer commits a change to that same section of
code (or vice versa), of course you want to have a conflict. You
absolutely don't want Subversion to silently drop some changes because
the context of those changes no longer exists.

-- 
Stefan Haller
Ableton
http://www.ableton.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org