Edward L. Fox, 16.11.2008: > On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 17:56, Markus Heidelberg > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > björn, 15.11.2008: > > [...] > > > > Avoiding these conflicts is more important than having nice commit logs. But > > there should be a way to get both. Edward, do you know why the trunk branch > > doesn't have nice commit logs and is there a way to get them in? Was this > > the > > lack of merge tracking before svn version 1.5? > > Because Bram doesn't like the idea of testing the most bleeding-edge > features on the trunk. So currently, honestly speaking, trunk has no > use at all.
Yes, trunk is intended to be bleeding-edge. Then it is only randomness that trunk is bleeding-edge at the moment and with Vim 8 trunk will stay on the latest Vim 7 branch? That would explain the "Recreated to point to the latest stable branch." log. > > You fetch from the trunk branch, right? What kind of conflicts did arise? I > > suspect mostly from the runtime files!? > > Any conflicts are possible. I'm not feeling surprised to that. > Because there's no much relationship in technical layer between the > trunk and the branches. The branches are not copied from the trunk. And apparently the 7.2 branch isn't based on the 7.1 branch, when comparing the "svn log" output. I wonder why this is the case. Shouldn't this have avoided merge conflicts between 7.1 and 7.2? > I'm not quite satisfied with the Subversion repository. However, I > don't know what I can do to improve the current situation. Basing the next branch on the current as it doesn't seem to has happened from 7.1 to 7.2? I don't know how you create your branches, but isn't it just "svn cp vim7.1 vim7.2" and then replacing the files with the 7.2 files? But maybe I'm lacking some knowledge on branching in subversion. Markus --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
