Robert Kern wrote: > David Cournapeau wrote: > >> Matthieu Brucher wrote: >> >>> > Oups, safe for the "/trunk:1-2871" part. This should be deleted >>> before >>> > a commit to the trunk, I think. >>> Yes, that's what I (quite unclearly) meant: since revision numbers are >>> per- repository in svn, I don't understand the point of tracking trunk >>> revisions: I would think that tracking the last merged version for >>> each >>> branch to be enough (for the kind of merge svn does, at least). If >>> trunk >>> version are tracked, then I would expect two branches using >>> svnmerge to >>> clash each other, >>> >>> >>> In fact, the trunk should be tracked from all the branches, although >>> there will be the problem with merging the different branches (I did >>> not have many troubles with that, but I only tried with a few >>> differences) into the trunk. I don't think only one branch wants to be >>> up to date with the trunk ;). >>> >> Sure, that's what I was trying to do (tracking the trunk). But if >> svnmerge needs the information from the trunk, this means each branch >> will need a different value, whereas only one value is possible... >> > > IIRC, its presence in the trunk/'s svnmerge-integrated property is a mistake. > It > belongs in each of the branches independently. For some reason, it got merged > into the trunk from one of the branches by mistake, possibly because someone > started merge tracking with svnmerge then another used "svn merge". It should > be > removed. > > I have to confess I may be the one who screwed up when creating one of the sconc branch (I normally take care to never commit to the numpy trunk, but I may have missed it using svnmerge).
cheers, David _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
