On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 05:38, emerson <echofloripa.yell_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Guys
>
> Thanks for the answers.
> First Andy, yes, we put more than the story code on the commits :)
> We are using svn 1.4.4 ont he server, so to be able to keep track of
> the ancestors logs we will probably need to upgrade.
Note that the 1.4 series has not been supported for quite some time,
and when 1.7 is released, 1.5 support will be dropped. You definitely
ought to upgrade.
> Still, I believe we need some tool to search the logs for that
> especific #xxxx code of the story.
> Correct me if I am wrong, but from there I would have to collect all
> the revision numbers, and apply them in a single merge manually? Is
> there any way to automate this?
If each story gets its own branch, then you don't have to worry about that.
> On 16 June 2010 22:40, Daniel Becroft <djcbecroft_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 4:20 AM, Bob Archer <Bob.Archer_at_amsi.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You're describing a normal usage of merging.
>>>> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.html
>>>>
>>>> You don't want to redo all those commit messages, you want the merge
>>>> to be aware of the history behind everything that's been done (which,
>>>> if you're using 1.5 or later, is taken care of), so that svn log can
>>>> trace back & all those messages fall right in line.
>>>
>>> Really... I didn't know this happened. If you look at the log of trunk where you have merged in from branch won't it only show the merge as a single rev with the message you made in the merge commit. How will you be able to trace the log back through the changes made in branch?
>>
>> It does, but not by default. You need to use the
>> '-g/--use-merge-history' switch.
>>
>> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.advanced.html#svn.branchmerge.advanced.logblame
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel B.
>>
>
Received on 2010-06-17 14:29:59 CEST