Patrick Oor wrote: > > Raman Gupta wrote on 02/14/2007 07:10:39 PM: > > > For this use case, my patch should resolve the issue you are having > > with property conflicts, without any loss of information: > > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.subversion. > > svnmerge.devel/309/match=svnmerge+spurious > > I have applied this patch and run a simple test. The result was OK: > indeed, the patch solves the simple transitive merging case described > below. > > > I think you are defining transitive merging this way: > > > > - There exists branch A, B, and C, and functionality F1, F2 > > - A merge of F1 and F2 occurs from A to B > > - A merge of F1 and F2 occurs from B to C > ... > > > Also, has the patch been accepted into svnmerge.py or is there a > > place where I > > > can get svnmerge.py with your patch to take this out for a spin? > > > > No it has not yet been accepted. This thread is the discussion thread > > for the patch, which started last October :-) You can get the patch > > from the URL above. > > I hope the patch will be accepted soon. Is not there any expectation > of when this can happen? It is certainly a useful patch for us.
IIRC, this patch, while simple, has some issues in that information is lost, and so won't be applied to svnmerge.py. Regards, Blair -- Blair Zajac, Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subversion training, consulting and support http://www.orcaware.com/svn/ _______________________________________________ Svnmerge mailing list [email protected] http://www.orcaware.com/mailman/listinfo/svnmerge
