On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:39:55AM +0100, Giulio Troccoli wrote:
> Hello guys, I hope you can help me with this becuase it's really annoying.
>
> I am testing SVN 1.6.2. At the moment we have 1.4.4.
>
> Our repository doesn't use the classic trunk/branches/tags layout, although we do have something similar.
>
> For each supported relase we have two streams: test and cand. Developers work in the test stream. When a change needs to go on an old release we have a script that automatically merges the changes into the next test stream. So, for example, if a developer commits some changed into 1.40/test, then the script will merge those changes into 1.51/test, then from 1.51/test to 1.60/test and finally from 1.60/test to 1.61/test.
>
> The script, smerge, has to be run manully by the developer on the SVN server box. This is becuase we didn't have (with 1.4.4) automatic conflict resolution and we don't want it now with 1.6.2. So, developers will need to manually resolve the conflicts during the merging process. And yes, we do keep a WC of the whole repository on the server just for this.
>
> With 1.4.4 everything worked fine. With 1.6.2 however, almost always I
> have a conflict on the root of the tree, e.g. 1.61/test/src (src is
> the only directory in test and it's there for legacy reasons). Oddily
> though the conflict is not during the merge, which developers would be
> asked to fix, but during the commit
Conflicts are only flagged during update and merge.
So commit complains about conflicts which were flagged during
update and merge but have not yet been resolved.
> svn: Commit failed (details follow):
> svn: Conflict at '/dip/1.61/test/src'
What do these commands print?
svn status /dip/1.61/test/src
svn info /dip/1.61/test/src
> Even more weird is the fact that if I don't do anything and simply try
> the merging again then everything is fine.
Conflicted items are skipped if you try to merge again.
> I thought that maybe I had the conflict because the WC for
> /dip/1.61/test/src was not up-to-date but I do issue an 'svn update'
> before merging.
>
> As anyone have any idea why the conflict? And how to resolve it?
We may be able to tell you more if you post the output of the above
commands.
Stefan
Received on 2009-06-11 12:57:49 CEST