> -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@elego.de] > Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 9:54 AM > To: Varnau, Steve (Neoview) > Cc: Daniel Becroft; users@subversion.apache.org > Subject: Re: Dangerous to keep re-integrated branches alive? > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 05:41:03PM +0000, Varnau, Steve (Neoview) > wrote: > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Stefan Sperling > > Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 5:10 AM > > To: Daniel Becroft > > Cc: Varnau, Steve (Neoview); users@subversion.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Dangerous to keep re-integrated branches alive? > > > After the reintegration merge, /trunk and the branch should be bit- > by-bit > > > identical. Period. > > > > No. That's not true in the general case. It's a common > misunderstanding though. > > See here for details: http://mail- > archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/subversion- > users/201009.mbox/%3c20100929200923.gc7...@ted.stsp.name%3E > > > > -------------- > > Thanks for both replies. So, at least one could do a double-check if > the files involved in the re-integration check-in revision are > identical on the branch. They should be, and if so, then it is safe to > block the merge and keep the branch alive. > > > > -Steve > > No, the files can differ. E.g. consider what happens if the branch modifies > the very last line of a file. Now the branch is synced to trunk to prepare > it for reintegration. The file receives no changes. Next, someone commits > a change to trunk changing the very first line of the file. Then you > perform the reintegrate merge, and it's likely that this merge is > conflict-free (unless the file is very short). Now you commit the result > of the reintegration merge, and the files on the branch and the trunk are > not the same -- they differ in the first line.
Okay, but then I would not want to block that revision with a record-only merge, right? I would want to pick up that merge resolution the next time I sync-up the branch. -Steve
