> >
> > Couple of questions:
> >
> > 1. "--summarize" complains that it can only work on URL-URL diffs. Is there a work around?
>
> No.
>
> Well, maybe you could do something like
> svn diff | grep ^Index
> to obtain a list of filenames from the full diff output?
>
Interesting idea. Out curiosity, what is the cause for the limitation?
>
> > 2. Running without "--summarize" works, but I see a ton of "mergeinfo" entries like:
> >
> > Property changes on: Somefile
> > ___________________________________________________________________
> > Modified: svn:mergeinfo
> > Merged /branches/path/Somefile:r19415-19622
> >
> > This is accurate I suppose (what's it indicate?), but gets in the way of seeing
> > the list of patched files. i.e. "Somefile" is unrelated to any of my changes.
> > Can this be suppresed?
>
> Not in Subversion 1.7, unfortunately.
>
> You will be able to suppress this in Subversion 1.8, which will ship
> with new --ignore-properties and --properties-only options to make
> everyone happy.
>
The "--ignore-properties" option seems like a big hammer for this use case.
I guess that I'm thinking "svn:mergeinfo" is more of an automatically maintained internal detail to aid in merge tracking. Seems a bit different than other properties like ignore or externals that are more closely related to the actual content of my code-base. Wrong?
Too late to request an "--ignore-housekeeping" option to svn diff for 1.8? :-)
>
> > 3. Running the above diff also outputs lines related to some files that I know I never modifed, but did recive updates via the merge. Oddly, these are all binary files.
> >
> > Index: Path/to/bin.dat
> > ===================================================================
> > Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
> > svn:mime-type = application/octet-stream
> >
> > What does this indicate?
>
> Not sure. Did these files also receive mergeinfo changes perhaps?
No, those files do not have any mergeinfo at all. At least for the couple I checked. They do have changes brought in by the merge, though.
Does this make any sense?
Received on 2012-08-30 00:06:08 CEST