Andrew McIntyre wrote: > > On Oct 28, 2005, at 12:06 PM, Daniel John Debrunner wrote: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >>> >>> Committed revision 329187. >>> >>> Any chocolate for contributing the largest patch? ;o) >>> >> >> Are you offering chocolate for messing up our codelines? :-) >> >> I know there's probably never a good time to do something like this, but >> some advance warning is really helpful. That allows developers some >> chance to minimize the number of changes in thier client. Pick a Sunday >> at least ten days away, and provide reminders during the week before. > > > For anyone that synced up to 329187 and now has a bunch of merge > conflicts (state 'C' in svn stat) sitting in your view, you should be > able to patch yourself and be back in order. From the top of the tree: > > svn up -r 329186 > svn diff > my.patch > svn revert -R * > svn up > patch -p0 < my.patch > > No warranties, expressed or implied. Use at your own risk, make a > backup (or patch a different view) if you're really worried, etc. :-)
That seemed like a great idea, but didn't work for me. :-( With just the svn update I had only one file in conflict. Then following Andrew's steps (as a test), the patch failed on most of my modified files. Your mileage may vary ... Now see if I can go back (again) to 329186 and apply my patch ... Dan.
