Johan Corveleyn wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 17:18:54 +0100: > On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote: > > Johan Corveleyn wrote on Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 10:17:34 +0100: > >> (the upcoming 1.7 release will improve the situation a bit, IIUC: the > >> not-affected-subtrees will no longer have their mergeinfo updated all > >> the time, only if they are affected by the merge). > > > > That surprised me a little, but a quick test with current trunk[1] > > confirms: > > Yes, it's kind of easy to miss, because there is no explicit issue in > the issue tracker for this AFAIK. But I vaguely remember some mail > threads on the dev-list about this, and saw it mentioned in the > description of another issue about mergeinfo ([1]).
There's quite a bit of traffic about mergeinfo. I try to follow the developments to some degree, but I missed (or forgot) about this change. > This refers to > revision r878767 ([2]), which is apparently the reintegration of a > feature branch "subtree-mergeinfo", which was made specifically for > developing this feature. > Thanks for the digging! > Since this is quite a big issue for a lot of users, it's important not > to forget about this change when the time comes to write the release > notes for 1.7. Maybe it should be mentioned on the roadmap page (as > one of the finished items), or an issue should be created in the issue > tracker? > (without expressing an opinion as to which option is preferable,) another option is to create a stub section in /site/publish/docs/release-notes/1.7.html. btw, I think there have been more release-notes-worthy merge-tracking changes than just this one. > Cheers, > -- > Johan > > [1] http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3577 > [2] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=878767
