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

Re: 2-way merging - bad?

From: John Browne <jkbrowne_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2005-06-22 20:41:19 CEST

Ok, I have gone back and re-read the Branching and Merging section of
the Subversion book...again. ;-) In this section, the
"my-calc-branch" example demonstrates how Sally's spelling error can
be ported from the trunk back into your own branch. Then, later, all
of the development in the branch is merged back into the trunk,
including the fixes for the spelling error. This is mainly what I am
confused about. The subversion book seems to says this is ok:

-- begin svn book quote --
Instead, you and Sally might continue to share changes as you work.
It's up to you to decide which changes are worth sharing; Subversion
gives you the ability to selectively "copy" changes between branches.
And when you're completely finished with your branch, your entire set
of branch changes can be copied back into the trunk.
-- end svn book quote --

However, others say it is best to only do 1-way merges. I'm trying to
understand any limitations that exist with this....for a future
project we will be doing using subversion.

On 6/22/05, Russ Brown <pickscrape@gmail.com> wrote:
> Joshua Varner wrote:
> > On 6/22/05, Tim Blackman <Tim.Blackman@sun.com> wrote:
> >
> >>On Jun 22, 2005, at 12:58 AM, John Browne wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Are there any "gotchas" with merging changes back and forth (2-way
> >>>merging) between the trunk and a branch? The subversion book seems to
> >>>imply that it's not a problem, but other things I've read say 2-way
> >>>merging is bad.. Seems like if the developers are using "clean"
> >>>working copies with no local mods when the merge occurs it should work
> >>>fine.
> >>>
> >>>Any thoughts?
> >>
> >>Merges don't always take into account files that have been moved in the
> >>branch or the trunk.
> >>
> >>- Tim
> >>
> >
> >
> > Here are some recent e-mails about it. I think the general consensus
> > is that merging should occur in only one direction at a time, unless
> > you want to spend the extra time to coordinate the changes b/w the
> > developers.
> >
> > http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=users&msgNo=33634
> > http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=users&msgNo=33078
> > http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=users&msgNo=31725
> >
> > svk and arch handle this a little better since it is more fundamental
> > to the distributed VC systems, so if it is necessary for you, you
> > might take a look at those.
> >
>
> I'm currently evaluating svk for this very purpose. I've been working on
> a local branch and smerging changes from the trunk to it on a regular
> basis (and I've not had to specify any to:from revisions when doing this
> either, which is nice). The acid test will be when I come to merge the
> branch onto the trunk. Should be interesting...
>
> Just had and idea, and tried that merge-back as a dry-run equivalent
> (smerge -C). It correctly showed that it would have merged the stuff
> I've been working on and ignored what had been merged in the other
> direction.
>
> So far so good!
>
> > Josh
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jun 22 20:43:16 2005

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