subversion-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Merge order affects final result for repeated added & deleted changes
Date Tue, 06 Aug 2013 08:05:46 GMT
Please use reply all to include the list. More below ...

On 6 Aug 2013 08:48, "Fredrik Orderud" <forderud@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 11:31 PM, Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Fredrik Orderud <forderud@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> > What happens in r5 is that repeated merging of the same change does
_not_
>> > cause duplication or merge conflict. Instead, r4 seems to be ignored.
The
>> > end result after r6 (a complete merge) is that r4 is missing from
branch B.
>> > This is inconsistent with svn:mergeinfo which claims that it has been
>> > merged. Patches to reproduce are attached.
>> >
>> > Could it be possible to make svn merges fail on repeated merges of the
same
>> > change, instead of just ignoring them?
>>
>> I can't offer much real help, but ... I've read something similar before
...
>> Ah, here it is:
>>     http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2013-04/0205.shtml
>>
>> a somewhat recent thread on the dev-list. It's quite an interesting
>> discussion IMO, so at least this gives you some context, and confirms
>> that this is known behavior.
>
>
> Thank you for the information Johan.
>
> At my employer, we have a change-approval process based on merging
changes from trunk to a release-branch. This merging often happens
out-of-order. This problem is really problematic for us, since we sometimes
loose changes in the merge process, even though svn claims to have merged
everything.
>
> Do you, or anyone else on this list, think it could be possible to
register a bug report on this issue?
>

Yes, go ahead and file an issue, and include links to this and the other
mail thread in the description.

At this point, I am not sure whether I'd call it a defect or an enhancement
request (asking for a new optional strict mode for merging), I guess it
depends on your point of view. But it doesn't matter that much, so go with
what you think is best.

-- 
Johan

Mime
View raw message