forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <rgard...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Advice on managing branches
Date Thu, 07 Oct 2004 15:39:30 GMT
Dave Brondsema wrote:
> Quoting Ross Gardler <rgardler@apache.org>:
> 
> 
>>As you have probably realised I have a branch for the sitemap-plugins. 
>>As a result of a mail from Sean Wheller 
>>
> 
> (http://issues.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listName=dev@forrest.apache.org&msgNo=14296)
> 
>>I am considering whether or not I should merge the changes from trunk 
>>into the branch. Sean says:
>>
>>"The diff between trunk and the sitemap-plugins is huge. It seams that 
>>the branch is drifting far away from the trunk.... This increases the 
>>likely hood that use of the standard svn switch dev method
>>will not work."
>>
>>However, I am not sure that this is the case. The branch works, although 
>>Sean is experiencing problems wehn doind a switch, but not when doing a 
>>co of the branch (we haven't got to the root cause yet of this yet). I 
>>have been watching commits to trunk, the only changes appear to be skin 
>>and documentation changes which have no direct affect on the branch.
>>
>>So, the question I want to ask is this. Should I bother merging the 
>>changes in trunk into the branch at this stage. I am particularly 
>>concerned about this because of the number of svn commit messages this 
>>will generate that will be of no value to devs.
>>
>>Advice please...
>>
>>Ross
>>
> 
> 
> I would suggest only doing the merging when you take the branch back into the
> trunk.  If their are critical changes in the trunk, you can merge that into the
> branch.  A minimalistic approach to merging will keep the branch's topic clear
> and understandable and will make the final merge easier.
> 
> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/svnbook-1.0/ch04s03.html#svn-ch-4-sect-3.2 might
> help some.  Notably, SVN doesn't record info about merge operations, so merge
> changes must be tracked manually (by checking logs, and putting revision #s in
> comments).
> 

Thanks, that's what I thought. The red flag for me was the paragraph:

"But which two trees should be compared? At first glance, the answer may 
seem obvious: just compare the latest trunk tree with your latest branch 
tree. But beware—this assumption is wrong, and has burned many a new 
user! [that's me!] Since svn merge operates like svn diff, comparing the 
latest trunk and branch trees will not merely describe the set of 
changes you made to your branch. Such a comparison shows too many 
changes: it would not only show the addition of your branch changes, but 
also the removal  of trunk changes that never happened on your branch." 
[http://svnbook.red-bean.com/svnbook-1.0/ch04s04.html]

Ross


Mime
View raw message