On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]> wrote: > > I find it onerous that one need do a merge for this kind of thing period. > Why not just apply the patch a second time? Sure, something is lost in SVN, > but it's covered elsewhere. Of course, the flip side is that by not doing > it, it becomes all that much harder to merge in the future. >
why use version control at all? by merging, the practical benefit to me is it tracks what has and hasn't been merged (my ide has a nice interface that lets me quickly see eligible revs by my username, etc) but if you just patch and commit twice, it looks to svn from the mergeinfo that you never merged that change back to branch_3x... if you are going to do this, then at least mark the revision as merged so it doesnt mislead people who are using version control. (separately merging makes life easier to me for anything non-trivial, a patch wouldn't apply cleanly anyway to both our branches, i'd rather just resolve the conflicting parts) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
