Am 18.10.2012 15:06, schrieb Stefan Sperling: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 02:10:25PM +0200, Sven Uhlig wrote: >> Am 17.10.2012 19:12, schrieb Stefan Sperling: >> At the time when the branches were created there was no use of shared >> code. Later some functions seem to be unexpectedly usefull in the other >> branch. > > That happens and is sometimes not avoidable, but it also indicates poor > planning and/or developer coordination. [...] > It sounds > like it is an exceptional circumstance, which means we're not talking > about a problem you are hitting often, which is good. Is that correct?
It is an exception. But I am afraid that this can happen at any time again. > And don't get me wrong, I'm just describing how Subversion works to > explain why you are seeing conflicts. I'm not saying these spurious > conflicts are a good thing. It is good that you have said that. I was not sure if you didn't understand the problem or if you are just describing SVN's behaviour. So you do understand and you are just describing - that's fine. >> I think that SVN records the wrong revisions for mergeinfo or copy >> because the file was not changed since addition but SVN still remembers >> a newer revision than the latest change and thus sees a conflict/difference. > > It doesn't record wrong information in the sense that the information > is inaccurate. My idea was that if SVN recorded other revisions or information then may be SVN could see that it is the same file. > Yes, there are some nice improvements coming in 1.8. But I don't > think the spurious add vs. add conflict we're talking about will be > automatically resolved in 1.8. Maybe in 1.9 or later. > We're currently still working on more basic problems in this area. Well, there are work-arounds available. If everyone knows them, and if everyone knows that there will be improvements at some time, then everything is fine. Unfortunately 1.9 is far away in the future :( > Reporting issues like this helps us to see what kinds of tree conflicts > people are hitting in practice. Before I posted to this list, I used Google to find similar issues and I did. So I was not sure if you'll accept yet another question for the same SVN error message. I'm glad to see that you still reply :) > This is very valuable and helps the project. > And more help is always welcome, if you're interested :) I'm not sure if I understand the last part "if you're interested." Do you mean help as active member of the mailing list, as a tester/bug reporter or help as a developer? Best regards Sven. PS: Sorry for the late reply.
