subversion-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kai Behncke <kai.behn...@uni-osnabrueck.de>
Subject Re: Question to svn merge (merge just parts of a diff)
Date Tue, 09 Feb 2016 11:30:33 GMT
Hi Bert,

first of all thank you for your response.

The following is exactly my case:
"If you have local changes, and then an update comes in with changes, 
you have a different situation. In that case we start a merge operation, 
that may or may not complete automatically depending on the combination 
of local and remote changes. You can even configure your own 3-way-merge 
tool to handle this merge step by your own tool in the config file."

Sorry, what do you mean with that? I can handle it by an own tool? You 
mean an own script?

Best regards, Kai

Am 09.02.2016 um 11:27 schrieb Bert Huijben:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kai Behncke [mailto:kai.behncke@uni-osnabrueck.de]
>> Sent: dinsdag 9 februari 2016 07:49
>> To: users@subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: Question to svn merge (merge just parts of a diff)
>>
>> Dear users,
>>
>> I`m quite new to svn. I would like to know it the following in svn is
>> possible:
>>
>>
>>
>> I have in (let`s say Revision 2) a file, that I have changed onetime (I
>> deleted "B"), with the following content now:
>> A
>> C
>> D
>>
>> Then, in Revision 3 an automatic update occurs. The new file has the
>> content:
>> A
>> B
>> E
>>
>> ...that means that some changes, that I made, are overwritten now. But
>> that should not be.....
>
> If all these versions were just committed and updated via the repository, this is the
intended behavior and there is nothing you can do about it. If on update the local file is
unmodified, the file is replaced by the new version. I can't think of a version management
system that does this differently. No merging happens in this situation
>
> If you have local changes, and then an update comes in with changes, you have a different
situation. In that case we start a merge operation, that may or may not complete automatically
depending on the combination of local and remote changes. You can even configure your own
3-way-merge tool to handle this merge step by your own tool in the config file.
>
>
>>
>>
>> A diff between 2 and 3 would show someting like:
>> A
>> -C
>> -D
>> +B
>> +E
>
> If everything is committed, then this is unrelated information. It is local modified
vs unmodified that handles the first step.
>
> Otherwise updates that skip revisions aren't possible, etc. etc.
>
>
> I think you need a more complete sample, perhaps even as a pseudo-script to describe
what you really want to ask.
>
> 	Bert
>
>>
>> Is there a possibility to do (for Revision 4) a "svn merge" to get a new
>> file, that:
>>
>> * "knows" that B has been deleted before, so it will not be reintegrated
>> *  does not delete  C and D (I would like to declare s.th. like: Don`t
>> delete anything that has been added in a former revision)
>> * integrates E (as a new entry, that has not been in any former version)
>>
>> so that a result like:
>> A
>> C
>> D
>> E
>>
>> ...comes out?
>> What I mean is: Is it possible to "have a look to a diff" and then
>> analyze automatically by the system the single-diff parts
>> to set some rules if the single diff-parts should be integrated or not?
>>
>> Thank you very much, Kai
>> --
>> ------------------------
>> Dr. Kai Behncke
>> Zentrum für Informationsmanagement und virtuelle Lehre
>> Raum 42/06, Heger-Tor-Wall 12, 49074 Osnabrück
>> Telefon: +49 (0)541/969-6505
>> http://www.virtuos.uni-osnabrueck.de
>

-- 
------------------------
Dr. Kai Behncke
Zentrum für Informationsmanagement und virtuelle Lehre
Raum 42/06, Heger-Tor-Wall 12, 49074 Osnabrück
Telefon: +49 (0)541/969-6505
http://www.virtuos.uni-osnabrueck.de

Mime
View raw message