Blair Zajac wrote:
Granted, it's known behavior, but part of svnmerge.py is to prevent
mistakes like this.
On large merges, you could easily miss this line if you're not paying
attention. So I would like to see svnmerge.py handle this case, either
by checking for stray files in the working copy or parsing the 'svn
merge' output.
Comments on either approach?
I totally agree...
Checking for stray files only handles one 'Skipped' case (trying to
add a file that already exists). It doesn't handle the case of a merge
that tries to patch a non-existent file. We should check for this too.
So in light of the above I think parsing the output is the better
approach.
-Archie
__________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs * CTO, Awarix * http://www.awarix.com
_______________________________________________
Svnmerge mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.orcaware.com/mailman/listinfo/svnmerge
