On 09/21/2011 01:36 PM, Julian Foad wrote: > I understand that 1.7 brings better user-visible behaviour of tree > conflicts, of a kind enabled by WC-NG: in "svn update", for example, I > think the base version in the WC is now always updated underneath any > tree conflict victim, which means no further update should be required > after resolving. I haven't tested that, so may not be quite right.
*should* be the case, yes... haven't tested either (AFAIR). I think in update we already tried to bring in the BASE node where possible, and I think those didn't work yet for deleted/added directories, only. > In CHANGES I can see notes about a few minor improvements to conflict > reporting and bug fixes to conflict detection, but nothing about the > above kind. Are there other improvements worth mentioning? That's a difficult question, as frankly I can't remember... We should probably do some 'svn log' surfing to find out (grep -i 'tree'). It's been quite a while since I've hacked tree conflicts. (BTW one of the TC tests still XFails: the one where an incoming dir deletion should be blocked when the local dir is different in any way. So at least that hasn't been fixed.) One of my to-do items is a comprehensive tree conflicts revisit, probably for 1.8... ~Neels
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature