Daniel Becroft <djcbecr...@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Joël Conraud <jconr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Like yourself, I initially though that it would be able to deal with this, >>> but it doesn't seem to (and there is probably a very good reason why it >>> can't). >>> >> >> I would be interested in knowing this "very good reason why it can't". I'm >> not questioning its validity, I'm confident this good reason is a good >> reason, but as I was surprised too by this behavior, if someone could give >> an explanation? I would be very interested.
The problem is that you have to commit on two branches at once. The workflow is (very roughly): go onto merge target branch svn merge source branch svn commit => making C switch to source branch svn merge -c $C --record-only target-branch svn commit We ended up writing scripts to do both of these things, which worked because we had a structured repository. A better fix would be to have commit C be marked as merge-from-source in some sort of commit property and to have merge to a branch omit changesets that are being merged back to that branch. But this has to be carried along so when you merge from A to B to C and merge C back to A you don't redo the A commits. So the bookkeeping is hard, but I think that's what it takes. Implementing this might or might not be easier than training everyone how to use Git :-) > For example, if I merge r10 from into a branch, I don't have to commit just > that merge. I can have modifications in my working copy, merge, make more > modifications, and commit in r11. The svn:mergeinfo will attest that r10 > from trunk has been merged in this revision, but it doesn't mean that r11 on > the branch is the logical equivalent of r10 on the trunk. > > I think that best practices suggest that doing things in this manner is a > bad idea, and should be discouraged. A revision that contains svn:mergeinfo > changes should only contain the file and structure changes logically > equivalent to the revisions that have been merged. Absolutely. This isn't a "clean changeset" and is madness; everyone should prohibit it.
pgpsxenOn9Zjw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
