2016-06-11 20:03 GMT+02:00 Branko Čibej <brane_at_apache.org>:
> On 11.06.2016 19:48, Olof wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Perhaps someone here can bring some light to this topic.
> >
> > We use the common technique with a trunk and feature branches. A
> > feature branch is created by branching trunk. The feature branch is
> > continually kept up-to-date with trunk by merging changes from trunk
> > to feature branch (rebase). When development in the feature branch is
> > finished the content is merged back to trunk.
> >
> > When the feature branch is merged back to trunk all changes to the
> > feature branch, including those created by rebase, is recorded in
> > svn:mergeinfo property of the affected file/folder in trunk. One
> > consequence of this is that files and folders which have not been
> > updated in the feature branch (except by rebase) is marked as changed
> > (property only) in trunk when the feature branch is merged back to trunk.
> >
> > The trunk log shows that these folders/files where changed when the
> > feature branch was merged back to trunk despite that no folder/file
> > content has been changed in the feature branch relative to trunk. This
> > is quite confusing for our users because TortoiseSVN shows that a lot
> > of folders/files they haven't changed have been updated in the merge.
> > In addition a lot of unchanged files will be shown as updated at next
> > SVN update command. Why is this necessary? Is it a desirable behavior?
> > Shouldn't SVN be able to figure our what's actually changed in the
> > feature branch relative to trunk and record only this mergeinfo?
>
> The real question is, where do all that mergeinfo properties come from.
>
> In typical usage, you'd have an svn:mergeinfo property on the root of
> each branch (including trunk). If mergeinfo properties are defined
> beneath the root, the most likely reason is that someone merged a
> subtree of the branch instead of the whole branch (hence, we call this
> subtree mergeinfo). During a merge, all subtree mergeinfo must be
> updated to reflect the merge results, regardless of whether there were
> any changes in the subtree.
>
> I'm also a bit confused about your wording (re: "folders/files"): do you
> actually have mergeinfo on files?
>
> -- Brane
>
Now I had a close look at my trunk log. For some commits only files are
changed, but there are also many commits for which mergeinfo is added to
subfolders despite commit on top level. For example the log might look like
a/b/c.txt - modified
a/b - modified, mergeinfo only
a/d/e.txt - modified
a/d - modified, mergeinfo only
a - modified, mergeinfo only
Since both subfolders of a has been committed I conclude that folder a must
have been committed in one single commit. The added mergeinfo in a, a/b and
a/d is essentially identical, folder change only. This doesn't occur for
all commits, only some. I cannot see a pattern for which ones. Ideas?
No, I don't have mergeinfo on files, my mistake.
Received on 2016-06-11 21:39:41 CEST