Bert Huijben wrote on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 11:07 +0200: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d...@daniel.shahaf.name] > > > > I'd like to understand the topology / flow of changes: what ensures that > > changes made directly to publish are not reverted by a subsequent > > promotion of staging? > > > > FWIW, in the Apache CMS, a "publish" operation uses 'svnmucc rm publish > > cp N staging publish', so it's an O(1) operation, but it literally > > overwrites any > > changes that may have been made directly to publish/. (I'm glossing over a > > detail but that's the gist) > > I think we should just use svn merge, to avoid these problems? No CMS here.
For clarity, I'm not proposing a move to the CMS; I'm simply pointing out that the physical way by which commits port from staging to publish, or from publish to staging, may be either 'svn merge + svn commit' or that 'svnmucc' replace operation.
