> > So what is the proper way to continuously perform the workflow we're
> > trying to do - that is pull changes from origin path into branch, push
> > changes to origin branch from branch, and repeat.
> >
> > Using bidirectional merge (without reintegrate) seems create severe
> > merge conflicts.
> So what is the proper way to continuously perform the workflow we're trying to
> do - that is pull changes from origin path into branch, push changes to origin
> branch from branch, and repeat.
>
> Using bidirectional merge (without reintegrate) seems create severe merge
> conflicts.
You can k
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:11:19AM -0500, James Hanley wrote:
> This is /really/ confusing as with the script I'm using reintegrate
> the first time to go from branch to trunk, but you're saying I also
> have to use it from trunk to branch - that is from origin to copied
> branch. I've read throug
This is /really/ confusing as with the script I'm using reintegrate
the first time to go from branch to trunk, but you're saying I also
have to use it from trunk to branch - that is from origin to copied
branch. I've read through Julian's post (repeatedly) and if I
understand right, the "reintegra
Okay - I read through and understand the use of reintegrate - but that
is what we are using and the script provided in the original post
uses. The issue is that even with its use, I'm getting a tree
conflict. Please read and test the script from the original post.
Meant to reply all (twice)
On
Okay - I read through and understand the use of reintegrate - but that
is what we are using and the script provided in the original post
uses. The issue is that even with its use, I'm getting a tree
conflict. Please read and test the script from the original post.
On Feb 24, 2013, at 7:59 AM, St
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 07:57:14AM -0500, James Hanley wrote:
> I guess I should have read the next response in the thread before replying...
So, to be clear (since you asked off-list):
The following changes to your script prevent the tree conflict with 1.7.
--- enduceTreeConflict.sh.orig Sun F
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 07:55:41AM -0500, James Hanley wrote:
> Is this a use case that was taken into consideration, and will it be
> "fixed" or the functionality/logic added to allow this use case?
See my other reply for more details, but yes, this is being addressed:
http://subversion.apache.or
I guess I should have read the next response in the thread before replying...
On Feb 24, 2013, at 7:52 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 12:14:04PM +, Andreas Tscharner wrote:
>>> So what is the proper way to continuously perform the workflow we're
>>> trying to do - that
Yes I have used git, etc - in the past, but we are forced to use svn
for the time being.
What I would like to quantify is if this shortcoming of subversion is
by design or if its a bug. From your description, it seems like the
former, and if so, what is the architectural reasoning?
I understand
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 12:14:04PM +, Andreas Tscharner wrote:
> > So what is the proper way to continuously perform the workflow we're
> > trying to do - that is pull changes from origin path into branch, push
> > changes to origin branch from branch, and repeat.
> >
> > Using bidirectional m
> So what is the proper way to continuously perform the workflow we're
> trying to do - that is pull changes from origin path into branch, push
> changes to origin branch from branch, and repeat.
>
> Using bidirectional merge (without reintegrate) seems create severe
> merge conflicts.
Short answ
So what is the proper way to continuously perform the workflow we're
trying to do - that is pull changes from origin path into branch, push
changes to origin branch from branch, and repeat.
Using bidirectional merge (without reintegrate) seems create severe
merge conflicts.
On Feb 22, 2013, at 7:
On 2013/02/22, at 14:15, James Hanley wrote:
> We are seeing merge tree conflicts where I believe svn is not working
> as expected. I'm not entirely sure if this is due to a lack of
> understanding for proper use on our part, but it was my understanding
> that reintegrate was to be used when pul
We are seeing merge tree conflicts where I believe svn is not working
as expected. I'm not entirely sure if this is due to a lack of
understanding for proper use on our part, but it was my understanding
that reintegrate was to be used when pulling changes from a branch and
pushing them into the co
15 matches
Mail list logo
