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

Re: alternative to CVS magic branches

From: Nick Stolwijk <nick.stolwijk_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:28:35 +0100

And it is also the one that makes the most sense to me.

If you have a branch with some changes and the next commit on trunk
contains a file you have changed and another file you haven't changed.
It is one commit, so all or nothing, it can contain breaking changes
if you merge half a commit. So, don't automerge this commit seems the
most prudent. Then the next commit only changes the file in the last
commit that you haven't changed on the branch. This can be automerged,
it doesn't contain any changes in files you already touched, but it
may depend on changes in the previous commit. So it may break your
branch if automerged.

I don't think any solution of this kind makes sense.

With regards,

Nick Stolwijk
~Senior Java Developer~

Wagenweg 208
2012 NM Haarlem
T +31 23 547 6369
F +31 23 547 6370
I www.iprofs.nl

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Bob Archer <Bob.Archer_at_amsi.com> wrote:
>> in CVSNT there's a feature called magic branches. Basically it
>> means that
>> if you branch from head (or any other branch) the all the files in
>> the
>> magic branch will continue to have all changes made in the future
>> until
>> the point where you change them. So if you have 20 files and you
>> change
>> only a small number of them you only have to merge changes to the
>> files
>> you modified, the others always have changes in the trunk.
>> Is the only option in Subversion to merge the trunk to the branch
>> regulary
> Yes, pretty much.
> BOb
Received on 2010-12-16 15:29:13 CET

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.