On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:23, Tom Halliley <thalliley_at_xede.com> wrote:
>
> Dunno if you can see these screen shots or not:
>
>
>
>
>
> on the left is a file that is correctly shown as existing on the trunk and release. The file on the right only appears to be on the trunk. I'd expect to see to release branch for both, with the one on the right having no revisions (yet) on the release branch. [perhaps my recollection is faulty, I use tksvn to create these graphs and that is what I remember/expected to see]
But you didn't answer my question. > Are the files you are seeing as
"normal" modified in the branch? Are the "abnormal" files untouched in
the branch? If so, that's to be expected - the unmodified "files" are
just pointers to the corresponding trunk revision.
>
> On 12/02/2010 10:05 AM, Andy Levy wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:00, Tom Halliley <thalliley_at_xede.com> wrote:
>
>
> I have a release branch, which was created from trunk. Most of the files on the release branch look normal (e.g., a revision graph shows both the trunk and release branch as part of the file's history). But for a few files, the revision graph only shows the files on the trunk, not on the release branch. Yet, as far as I can remember, all files were copied from the trunk to the release branch in the same manner (svn merge).
>
> Any ideas as to why these files might be handled differently? If I do 'svn co' on the release branch, these files are fetched into my local copy (as though they're on the branch). It appears that the files are associated with their parent directory which is versioned on the release branch, but the files themselves are not (on the branch).
>
>
> Are the files you are seeing as "normal" modified in the branch? Are
> the "abnormal" files untouched in the branch? If so, that's to be
> expected - the unmodified "files" are just pointers to the
> corresponding trunk revision.
>
>
>
>
Received on 2010-12-02 16:40:29 CET