On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:27, Marco <zakmck73_at_yahoo.it> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> sorry if the question has been already made, I cannot find trace of that.
>
> I don't know if it's only me, but I really feel SVN is missing support for real tagging and real branches. Having to simulate these features with copies is quite painful, especially when I work with branches. In fact in that case, it's quite clumsy to produce the usual work flow:
>
> - create branch
> - make changes
> - merge from trunk
> - changes
> - merge again from trunk
> - ...
> - switch back to trunk and merge from branch
>
> This work flow currently has to be simulated in SVN by fiddling with revision numbers. To me it's just crazy, it would be much better if SVN understood what branches are and was able to understand the common mean assigned to "merge from X", i.e.: only the last changes from the last merging or creation.
I'm not sure I understand. Subversion's merge tracking may not be
omniscient, but this sounds like a typical "topic branch" workflow,
which works without revision number gymnastics in subversion 1.5 and
later. Isn't this roughly the workflow you're describing?:
svn cp TRUNK_URL BRANCH_URL
svn co BRANCH_URL BRANCH_WC
cd BRANCH_WC
while not done
{
...hack hack hack...
svn commit
svn merge TRUNK_URL
(this will bring you up to date with changes on trunk since branch creation)
svn commit
(this commits the merge from trunk)
}
svn co TRUNK_URL TRUNK_WC
cd TRUNK_WC
svn merge --reintegrate BRANCH_URL
svn commit -m "BRANCH reintegrated into TRUNK"
svn rm -m "BRANCH obsoleted through reintegration" BRANCH_URL
// Ben
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=2424201
Please start new threads on the <users_at_subversion.apache.org> mailing list.
To subscribe to the new list, send an empty e-mail to <users-subscribe_at_subversion.apache.org>.
Received on 2009-11-25 12:28:55 CET