Karl,
what you are saying makes sense, but my observation is the oposite.
I get conflict in range merge while one-by-one merge is fine.
Do you have any explanation for this situation?
Zoran
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karl Fogel [mailto:kfogel@red-bean.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 7:58 AM
> To: Bosnjak Zoran
> Cc: users@subversion.tigris.org
> Subject: Re: merge range of revisions or one by one
>
> "Bosnjak Zoran" <Bosnjak@iskratel.si> writes:
> > Should I get the same result if I merge:
> >
> > - a set of revisions from branch X to my working copy, like this:
> > $cd working_copy
> > $svn merge -r rev1:rev2 url_of_X
> >
> > - or the same set of revisions, but one at the time in sequence, like
> this:
> > $cd working_copy
> > $<for each rev from rev1:rev2 do>
> > $ svn merge -r (rev-1):rev url_of_X
> > (rev1 is 'from revision', so it's not included in a loop)
> >
> > I have 96 revisions to merge.
> > In the first approach I end up with one conflicted file.
> > But in the second approach I get no conflicts.
> > The reset of the branch is merged correctly.
> > (observed on svn 1.4.3)
> >
> > Where is the trick?
>
> You can get different results, because later changes can cancel out
> (undo) earlier ones. For example, say r22 is a reversion of r21, and
> r21 conflicts with something in the working copy you're merging into.
> If you do the one-by-one merge, you'll encounter the conflict, but if
> you do the range merge (which just merges in the diff between the
> endpoints), you won't get the conflict.
>
> -Karl
>
> --
> Subversion support & consulting <>
> http://producingoss.com/consulting.html
Received on Wed May 9 08:10:13 2007