Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote: > -On [20090624 10:18], Christian Boos ([email protected]) wrote: > >> Ok to delete them? >> > > Go right ahead. > >
Ok, did so in r8296 and that change was propagated to the other branches in later merge changesets: - http://trac.edgewall.org/changeset/8297 - http://trac.edgewall.org/changeset/8298 - http://trac.edgewall.org/changeset/8299 Speaking of those, now that we're all(?) using Subversion 1.5/1.6 "svn merge" and its svn:mergeinfo, the use of the svnmerge.py script has become a bit redundant. One nice feature of the script vs. the command was that with svnmerge you could explicitly record a change as being "blocked", whereas with the command, you have to fake the merge (using --record-only, as shown in r8297 above). But that's a minor thing. Now I wonder if it's a good idea to keep using both "svnmerge" and "svn merge" for tracking merge information (as I did in r8297 and r8298), or if it's not time to use exclusively "svn merge" and forget about svnmerge.py? -- Christian --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
