On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 1:59 AM, Cooke, Mark <mark.cooke_at_siemens.com> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: KARR, DAVID [mailto:dk068x_at_att.com]
>> Sent: 12 July 2012 00:39
>> To: users_at_subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: If our SVN server is 1.6.12, why don't I see older
>> merge history on elements merged from branch to trunk?
>>
>> It appears that our SVN on our server was recently upgraded
>> from a version before merge history tracking was implemented,
>> to version 1.6.x, where merge history should be available.
>
> I wonder why a "recent" upgrade used 1.6.x instead of 1.7.x...
I can answer that one. Many high stability OS distributions, like
RHEL, are *loathe* to upgrade important components to versions that
cannot interact well with previously supplied versions systems. Using
1.7.x breaks clients and makes them inaccessible 1.6.x clients: this
has been going on with every major version upgrade. It's why I SRPM
building tools for 1.7.5 at http://www.github.com/nkadel, capable of
building for RHEL 4, 5, and 6, and have been pushing updates to
Repoforge for some time.
(RHEL 4 is still Subversion 1.1.4. E-e-e-e-e-w-w-w-w-w!)
>> However, I checked the SVN history for an element that I made
>> changes to on a branch, and I looked at that same element
>> after it was merged (by someone else) to the trunk. My
>> changes are in that file, but the SVN history doesn't include
>> the checkin that I did. Is this simply happening because of
>> how the merge to trunk was done? Is there a particular way
>> that merges have to be done to preserve merge history?
>
> It sounds like you are expecting merge history to magically appear for merges done _before_ the server was upgraded? In that case, no, svn does not go back and try to re-create history (I suspect that would be at best an error-prone exercise) but you should start to see info being added going forward.
>
> Or did I misunderstand your question?
>
> ~ mark c
>
Very good point, Mark.
Received on 2012-07-12 14:44:32 CEST