On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Paul Burba ptbu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name
wrote:
Paul Burba wrote on Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 20:06:34 -0400:
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name
wrote:
Paul
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
Paul Burba wrote on Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 20:06:34 -0400:
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name
wrote:
Paul Burba wrote on Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 10:30:50 -0400:
As described in
Paul Burba wrote on Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 20:06:34 -0400:
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name
wrote:
Paul Burba wrote on Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 10:30:50 -0400:
As described in issue #2915, in 1.6 when a merge target is a missing
subtree due to its removal
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
Paul Burba wrote on Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 10:30:50 -0400:
As described in issue #2915, in 1.6 when a merge target is a missing
subtree due to its removal by non-svn means, we try to record
mergeinfo such that the
Paul Burba wrote on Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 10:30:50 -0400:
As described in issue #2915, in 1.6 when a merge target is a missing
subtree due to its removal by non-svn means, we try to record
mergeinfo such that the missing subtree doesn't have (or inherit)
mergeinfo describing the merge:
(If
5 matches
Mail list logo
