> On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
>
> > > On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 04:23:09PM -0700, Randall
> > > Reynolds wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I created a trunk and branch A from the trunk. Then,
> > > I created a file in the trunk. Then, I merged from
> > > the trunk to the branch using TortoiseSVN's merge two
> > > branches option. The merge encountered a tree conflict
> > > on the file. Selecting edit tree conflict says:
> > > The last merge operation tried to delete/move/rename
> > > the file 'file'
> > > but the file was deleted, moved, or renamed locally.
> > >
> > > This message suggests that a merge operation tried to
> > > delete/move/rename a file, and does not suggest that
> > > the merge operation tried to add the file.
> > >
> > > Why?
> >
> > Hard to say. It depends entirely on the parameters you
> > passed to the 2-URL merge.
> >
> > With the 'merge 2 branches' option, if you don't understand
> > 100% what you're doing it is very easy to make mistakes
> > which cause spurious conflicts.
> >
> > See http://subversion.apache.org/docs/svn-merge.txt for
> > a short conceptual description of what the various merge
> > options are doing (this is the output of 'svn help merge'
> > in Subversion 1.7). The order of syntax types listed in
> > that text matches the order in which tortoisesvn presents
> > its merge options.
> >
> > > What should I do to make the branch match the trunk,
> > > in this case? How can I prevent the tree conflict
> > > from showing up in the future for this file?
> >
> > To merge from the trunk to the branch try using the
> > first ("Merge a range of revisions") of the 3
> > options which tortoisesvn presents. That should do
> > the right thing.
> >
> > To merge the other way (branch back into trunk), use
> > the 'reintegrate' option.
> >
> > The 'merge 2 branches' option is only necessary for more
> > complex cases.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randall Reynolds [mailto:randallmreynolds_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: 08 December 2011 15:19
> To: Randall Reynolds; users_at_subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Question
>
> Stefan,
>
> I did not understand the three merge options and clearly
> chose the wrong option. After reading your response and
> reading about the merge options, I now understand this. Thank you.
>
> I changed my workflow to use the first option and merged the
> range <#>-HEAD, where <#> is the last trunk revision when I
> merged the trunk into the branch.
>
> As a follow-up question, how can I make absolutely sure the
> merge worked? When I try to merge the same revision range a
> second time, the message log is empty (indicating nothing is
> happening, which is good), and I tried diffing the trunk with
> the branch and they *look* synchronized. I also noticed
> there is a fourth action icon in the trunk log that looks
> like a merge icon. Aside from manually keeping track of the
> ranges I am merging, is there a better way to know which
> revision range to merge next time? Ex. using the icons in
> the tortoise log? Ex. Should I leave the revision range
> blank in the future?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Randall
Can I suggest you read the tortoiseSVN manual pages on merging, they provide a lot of good information...
http://tortoisesvn.net/docs/release/TortoiseSVN_en/tsvn-dug-merge.html
Recent versions of subversion (and hence Tortoise) do "merge tracking" for you so long as you keep your life simple and always merge from the same folder (don't mess around merging sub folders or it can make life complicated). So if you leave the revision range field blank, tortoise fills it in for you.
~ mark c
Received on 2011-12-08 16:29:39 CET