On 12/15/2011 07:53 AM, Julian Foad wrote: > This "sync merge from my own history" operation seems bogus. I notice > that (without my patch) it merges changes from the future *and* records > mergeinfo > for them. Surely we didn't ever intend that?
Subversion has supported "sync merge from my own history" since before merge was written. It's called "svn update". :-) Seriously, I'm having trouble coming up a really solid use-case for supporting this. You could never commit the results of that merge because any changed files would necessarily be out of date. *Maybe* if you were trying to build a custom branch with select changes, you might 'svn update -rOLD_REV', selective merge changes from the future of the branch, and then copy the whole thing elsewhere. But let's nip that in the bud, and suggest instead that folks trying to do this update to HEAD, and selective reverse-merge the revisions they *don't* want. At least that's a scenario that's supportable and committable while still logically equivalent to the former. -- C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
