Martin v. Löwis wrote: >> There are potential problems with doing it that way [1]. The safer >> option is to do: >> >> svn revert . >> svnmerge merge -M -F <py3k-rev> > > I still don't see the potential problem. If you do svnmerge, svn commit, > all is fine, right?
Sort of. svnmerge still gets confused by the fact that the revision being backported already has changes to the svnmerge metadata, so you have to either revert it (which is always wrong), or flag it as resolved (I believe that svnmerge actually does get that case right, but I haven't checked it extensively - since if it does get it right, I don't understand why it leaves the conflict in place instead of automatically marking it as resolved). Regardless, the consequences of forgetting that you did the svn up after the merge instead of before (e.g. if it took some time to get the backported version working, or if something interrupted you between the initial backport/update and the final test and commit step) are fairly hard to clean up, so I prefer the safe approach (despite the extra minute or two it takes for svnmerge to recalculate the metadata changes). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
