On 05/25/2011 07:45 AM, Stephen Butler wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Attached is a reproduction script. I could reproduce the corrupted working
> copy in 1.6.16.
>
> With 1.7 (r1127008), the corruption doesn't occur, but there's still a bug:
> 'svn status' displays bar.java (as deleted) after the merge. The revert of
> bar.java has no effect.
>
> Anyway, making local changes to a working copy just to avoid tree
> conflicts, is a sign that Subversion's conflict resolution is lacking. There's
> no way to tell the merge command to resolve add-vs-add tree conflicts by
> merging the trees.
>
> I guess we need 'svn merge --accept theirs-conflict' (or mine-conflict) to
> apply to tree conflicts. That would be useful for 'svn update', too. This
> falls under issue 3144:
>
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3144
> "interactive conflict resolution does not know about tree-conflicts"
>
> Note: At the end of the script I include an alternate workaround: 'svn copy
> ^/trunk/config/foo' to the branch. This has the advantage of preserving
> each file's history.
>
>
>
> Steve
>
Excellent, Steve. I thought about the 'theirs-conflict' option to
resolve this as well. Hope my problem can result in some improvements to
svn. :)
David
Received on 2011-05-26 00:50:53 CEST