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

RE: merging advice

From: Jeremy Mordkoff <jlm_at_ZeeVee.Com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 12:01:55 -0400

> From: Mark Phippard [mailto:markphip_at_gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 11:28 AM
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Jeremy Mordkoff <jlm_at_zeevee.com> wrote:
> > We recently started using merge tracking. My first attempt at updating SVN
> > to create all of the correct svn:mergeinfo records was somewhat successful.
> > I was able in the end to run a svn mergeinfo report and get accurate  info
> > back.
> It sounds like you have done this yourself somwhat manually? How did you do it?

Lots of
svn merge --record-only

> > But as part of all of this, I have ended up with some strange entries in my
> > merge-info records, for example, this is for the top of /zcode/trunk:
> >
> > /repos/zcode/trunk:8*
> > /zcode/branches/es_zvb_reset:9521-9652*
> > /zcode/branches/rel_2_1:8309-9341*,9605*,9633*
> > /zcode/branches/rel_2_2:9342-9680*
> > /zcode/trunk:9-8308*,8603*,8612-8613*,8621*,8809*,8850*,8924*,9053*,9122*,9271*
> >
> > The first entry makes no sense to me as it includes the /repos part of the
> > path which is a directory name on the server and NOT part of the path names
> > in svn.
> I'd probably just fix it. How did it get there?
> > The next three lines make sense
> >
> > The last line also does not make sense to me as there should be no need to
> > record a merge from trunk to trunk.
> There have been various fixes to not record self-referential
> mergeinfo. Are you using 1.6.5 client do to this? I would edit the
> property to remove that.

I was on 1.6.4. I have since updated.

> > Should I be worried?
> I would be concerned about all of those *. That tells me you probably
> did something like use a depth=empty working copy to record mergeinfo.
> The * tell Subversion the mergeinfo is not inheritable. I'd probably
> just edit the property to remove the * and then do not do it that way
> again in the future.

This is exactly what I did.

Under /zcode/trunk we have about 9 subdirectories. Different projects use different subsets of these directories. When I was re-integrating the changes made in some branches, I only checked out the directories that were included in those checkouts. I goggled depth=none subversion merge and I did not see any warnings about this. Perhaps I did not read enough.

At this moment, all branches have been re-integrated into trunk. Should I just remove all merge-info records across the board and start over using only fully populated work spaces? That will be a major pain in the rear since it will quadruple the space and time needed.



To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-10-05 18:03:05 CEST

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