On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 4:28 AM, Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 09:09:14PM -0800, Jeff Mott wrote: >> I just discovered that using --ignore-ancestry fixed the problem. This >> caused SVN to update rather than replace my working copy. > > What is the ancestral relationship between the branches containing > the vendor drops? I assume they are just freshly imported directories? > > Stefan >
Yes, they are freshly imported directories. I found in the SVN book where this behavior is explained (http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn.branchmerge.advanced.html#svn.branchmerge.advanced.ancestry). Fourth paragraph under the "Noticing or Ignoring Ancestry" section. I only wish they mentioned all this in the Vendor Branches chapter.
