On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 07:06:10AM -0700, Randall Reynolds wrote:
> Little tangent here, but FWIW I found that the version on the server
> supported merge tracking so it was super wierd that the whole codebase
> reported tree conflicts. I think we merged incorrectly a long time ago and
> this might have caused the conflicts. I just rebranched, problem solved,
> next step need to make sure we're merging correctly.
Feel free to ask about use cases you're having trouble with.
Providing this list with a small transcript of a merge you're trying
to run and having problems with is a good way of verifying that you're
driving the tool correctly. Most cases I've heard people complain about
really boil down to user errors. But there are some cases where the tool
flags spurious tree conflicts even though the user has done the right
thing. So sometimes it's not easy to tell. But we're glad to help :)
We're also working towards getting less spurious conflicts flagged with
each release. I am somewhat hopeful 1.8 will make a huge leap in this area.
There is some good stuff in progress but it's too early to tell how much of
it will end up in the final 1.8 release at this point. To that end, we're
very interested in any use cases you have trouble with to help us understand
what matters most to Subversion users in practice. Thanks!
Received on 2011-12-09 15:22:40 CET