On 1/16/14, 1:38 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> On 1/16/14, 12:31 PM, Andrew Reedick wrote:
>> I need a sanity check. Is this an oversight that needs to be corrected, or
>> am I missing something?
>>
>> Problem:
>> "svn log -g" will explicitly identify a reverse merge, however, when
>> specifying xml output ("svn log -g --xml") no such identification is made.
>
> Yup looks like an oversight. The nesting already shows that it's a merge and
> what revision made the merge. But we don't show the direction of the merge.
>
> I've coded up a trivial change to add a reverse-merge attribute on the
> logentry
> element in this case. e.g.
> <logentry revision="13" reverse-merge="true">
>
> Once I write a test for it I'll commit it.
>
> Given that it changes the XML output, I probably wouldn't backport this to
> 1.8.x.
Opened issue #4463 for this:
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4463
