> -----Original Message-----
> From: marlene cote [mailto:mcote_at_juniper.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 1:10 PM
> To: users_at_subversion.tigris.org
> Cc: Eric Peterson
> Subject: Question about merging and branch management
> how do folks handle branch merges? Do you create one dev branch for a
> project, and sync from TOT periodically, or do you create new branches
> of TOT and merge from the previous dev branch to the new branch? I
> both of these today, and found many fewer files get merged with the
> approach. I need to understand the impact this approach would have
> the road when I try to reintegrate to TOT?
I think the second is less effort to maintain, but you do have to switch
your developers over to the new branch each time you do this. Also, I
expect you'll see that the history looks a little weird, because if you
make a change in branch A, and merge it to branches B, then C, then D,
then E, and then finally back to trunk, then what you're going to see in
the trunk, even when you show the merged revisions, may not be so
helpful. The trunk just has E's merge, part of which was the merge from
D, part of which was the merge from C...all the way back to A.
The down sides with merging repeatedly from the trunk to a branch are
the time to merge, plus all the changed files, which will bloat the
repository prior to version 1.6 ( see
Personally, with a 1.6 repository I would tend towards repeatedly
merging to the branch rather than creating a new branch. I would only
go to a new branch after merging all of that branch's changes to the
trunk. But there's certainly room for personal preference.
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-10-28 15:36:07 CET