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

Re: Making a branch the new trunk

From: Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel_at_comcast.net>
Date: 2006-06-13 13:45:31 CEST

Peter Werner wrote:
>> What is the best practice to abandon the current trunk and make some
>> branch the new trunk? Say I have created a branch by calling
>> svn copy trunk branch/foo
>> and then make changes on the branch and on the trunk. After a while
>> I decide that I won't further develop the trunk version and that
>> branch/foo should be the new trunk. I would do it this way:
>> svn rm trunk; svn move branch/foo trunk
>> Is this the correct and best way to do it? Or are there any
>> drawbacks or better ways?
> I think that is the right way, because history of changes will not be
> lost.
> Br, Péter

I'd like to disagree, here. You may not actually want the vast, detailed
history of the branch integrated into the trunk, especially the history of
failed changes. By doing an actual "svn merge" operation, coupled with any
bits that get missed by the merge, you get a much smaller and compact set of
changes that are easily logged. And if that merge, or the copy operation you
describe, is done at revision 100, you get a considerably more meaningful
historical continuity between revisions before the change and after the

Also, while many source control managers believe that a souce control system
should never forget anything, I'm of the firm belief that interweaving
sources causes trouble, since it means you can never discard the branch from
the repository if you do that sort of "copy" operation.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Jun 13 13:46:48 2006

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.