On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 01:37:36AM -0400, Greg Stein wrote: > On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 18:21, Bert Huijben <b...@qqmail.nl> wrote: > >... > >> From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@elego.de] > >... > >> > As Bert explained, we need to remove them when the user runs "svn > >> > resolved". He also noted that (somtimes) it is possible manually > >> > resolve a conflict by removing all the conflict files (a potentially > >> > debatable feature). > >> > >> I see. Then let's just add another field to the skel. > >> I guess we can store this within the conflict-type-specific data? > > I believe so. It doesn't seem to apply to the OPERATION sub-skel. Each > type of conflict has a different set of in-working-copy files that it > may need to record.
Yes. > I'll update conflict-storage "soon". Not really there right now. OK. I'll also try to update it if I find some time. > >> Storing the basename should be enough since we can assume the file > >> will be put into the same directory as the conflicted file, right? > > > > For text conflicts this would be the case, but for a property conflict on a > > directory it would be harder to tell where the file is located. (What if the > > directory is missing?). Greg suggested adding a wcroot-relative path on IRC. > > Right. The wcroot is definitely known, and any path is > reachable/computable from there. We don't need to worry about > "basename relative to WHAT directory?" +1 > I've written two functions: svn_wc__db_to_relpath() and > svn_wc__db_from_relpath(). These can/should be used for all > abspath/relpath conversions within libsvn_wc when a path needs to be > persisted. Using them for *other* purposes is verboten. Practicing your German in preparation for your trip to Berlin is definitely a good idea :) Stefan
