It is possible that there are two ranges. It is not my intent to have these
two ranges, it would just be from the mechanics of svn copy. I have
recently switched from CVS where I did merges with tags. I am attempting to
use svn copy to do the same thing.
I make a new tag (svn copy) in my production version source every time I
merge changes forward into my development version. Then I do an svn merge
between the prior tag I created this way
(svn://192.168.0..../tags/one-month-ago) and the current tag
(svn://192.168.0..../tags/just-created).
In the example that I had given 461 would be the last commit before the svn
copy and 462 is the svn copy itself.
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Bob Archer" <bob.arc...@amsi.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 1:38 PM
To: "Daniel Walter" <d2wal...@hotmail.com>; <users@subversion.apache.org>
Subject: RE: duplicate merge conflict
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Bob Archer" <bob.arc...@amsi.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 9:33 AM
To: "Daniel Walter" <d2wal...@hotmail.com>;
<users@subversion.apache.org>
Subject: RE: duplicate merge conflict
>> When I merge changes in SVN, the merges work well except for the
>> conflicts. For some reason, the merges are frequently (but not
>> always done twice). As an example:
>> <<<<<<< .working
>> <<<<<<< .working
>> const int SERIALIZE_FIELDS_DATA_LENGTH = 83;
>> =======
>> const int SERIALIZE_FIELDS_DATA_LENGTH = 91;
>> >>>>>>> .merge-right.r462
>> =======
>> const int SERIALIZE_FIELDS_DATA_LENGTH = 91;
>> >>>>>>> .merge-right.r461
>> It appears that I am merging the changes between versions 442
and
>> 462 into the current working copy so I don't understand where
461
>> is coming from.
>>
>> This is happening both with Tortoise SVN (using Merge two
different
>> trees) or from the command line with:
>>
>> svn merge tree1 tree2 --non-interactive
>
> Can you revert your merge and verify that your working copy
didn't already
> have those r461 merge indicators in it. I know here people have
checked in
> files that had unresolved conflict markers in them.
>
I reverted to the original source and verified it. It had no
conflicts.
Then I did the merge again. The same thing happened and I ended up
with
duplicate conflicts again.
Is it possible you are merging in a range of non-contiguous revision? I
believe that does a merge of each range separately.
BOb
