Konstantin Kivi wrote:
> Merge tracking implementation by means of mergeinfo property is bad.
> After one of the files is individually merged, it gets mergeinfo property.
> All subsequent merges, even to the head of the branch causes this file's mergeinfo
> update, tags file as modified ( in a sense that it has to be commited) and then
> include it's name in commit information.
> After a short period of time, it's impossible
> to make a merge without commiting a whole lot of irrelevant files. It is not possible
> to tell from log then, which files were actually modified. This is extremely annoying.
> One may argue, that merging individual file is a bad habit. But in that case why there is support
> for such functionality? Or why just don't stop encourage this bad practice and outlaw mergeinfo on files?
> I personally liked functionality of svnmerge utility. It has some shortcomings, too, like
> making conflicts in svnmereg:integrated, but it did its job - provided merge
> tracking in a controlled manner.
> I understand that this new functionality is supposed to supersede svnmerge. But the way it is
> implemented does at least as much harm as good. We at our company end up routinly running scripts
> that deletes mergeinfo from files, otherwise it's not possible to work.
> I think that the best way to fix this problem without major changes is to make mergeinfo property hidden.
> Commands like status, diff, and, most important, log shouldn't show files whose only change is in mergeinfo property unless specifically told to do so by a command line switch.
I second fixing this issues, although I'm not privy to the merits of
fixing it the way Konstantin suggests. I expected 1.6 to be better with
merging, but it seems to have made things worse. Yesterday, I did a
merge and a bunch of unchanged files had a bunch of svn:mergeinfo
I see a lot of emails about this on the list recently. Will a developer
take responsibility and fix this issue once and for all? Is there
something that we as a community can do to help speed things along?
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-04-08 18:02:01 CEST