On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 8:57 PM Sands, Daniel N. via users <users@subversion.apache.org> wrote: > > Oh yes, a lot has changed since 1.8 (which is EOL for a long time > > already). Actually, the major improvement came client-side in version > > 1.10, with the interactive tree conflict resolver [1]. This uses a > > lot > > of information from both working copy and repository to figure out > > what the sensible options are in case of a tree conflict, and > > attempts > > to resolve some of those automatically. You should upgrade your > > clients to _at least_ 1.10 to have a reasonable experience with tree > > conflict situations. After 1.10 lots of bugfixes and improvements > > have > > been made to the tree conflict resolver, so I would recommend to go > > for 1.14 (which is actually the only supported version ATM [2]). > > Yeah I'm using RHEL8 which currently supports 1.10. I also compiled > the latest version of 1.14 to see if it had any improvement. > Unfortunately they all fail the same way in attempting to resolve file > moves.
Sorry for the late response, but I lack the time to dig deeper. It should work as in the example (test) that Stanimir Stamenkov posted earlier in this thread. Is your case the same as in the DERBY issue that Stanimir referenced [1]? Maybe you can narrow it down to a test with a repository from scratch, or narrow down to a specific step that might have confused the tree conflict resolver? Perhaps someone else on this list has some more ideas / can zoom in on the case in [1]? [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-7144?focusedCommentId=17582731&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-17582731 -- Johan
