Iakov Glubokiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hello all, > > I'd like to discuss some thoughts about merging from a branch several > times. AFAIU, Cederqvist ommited the tiny fact that using double -j > one can lose some data. He says: > [...] > Now suppose that development continues on the ▒R1fix▓ branch: > +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ > ! 1.1 !----! 1.2 !----! 1.3 !----! 1.4 !----! 1.5 ! <- The main trunk > +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ > ! * > ! * > ! +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ > Branch R1fix -> +---! 1.2.2.1 !----! 1.2.2.2 !----! 1.2.2.3 ! > +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ > ==== > > well, in that certain case suggested > > cvs update -j 1.2.2.2 -j R1fix m.c > > works fine. > But in more common case, when the trunk was changed too, we can > overwrite changes in trunk by changes in the branch!
Why?! Did you test it or just guessing? > Where single -j > update produces conflict, double -j produces overwrite. Look: > > +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ > ! 1.1 !----! 1.2 !--...---! 1.5 !----! 1.6 !----! 1.7 ! <- The main trunk > +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ > ! * > ! * > ! +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ > Branch R1fix -> +---! 1.2.2.1 !----! 1.2.2.2 !----! 1.2.2.3 ! > +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ > > Here > > cvs update -j 1.2.2.2 -j R1fix m.c > > conflicting changes at 1.2.2.3 just discard changes at 1.6-1.7 I don't think so. At least my experience is different. You should get conflict here I believe. [...] -- Sergei. _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
