On 12/13/06, Giovanni Bajo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thomas Wouters wrote: > Merging with svnmerge has a big consequence: changes that are applied to > both the trunk and the p3yk branch are hell. You do know you can use svnmerge merge --record-only, cherry-picking the changes that have been applied on both branches, and then use a single svnmerge merge for everything else?
Sure, but how do you tell that is has been properly applied to both branches? If they are the exact same change, it's not really a big deal unless lots of other work happened in either branch. The more common case, in p3yk, is for the changes to be subtly different (for instance, 'has_key' being replaced by 'in', in the p3yk branch, missing __future__ imports, indentation being different, etc.) You end up having to make sure there are no accidentally hidden changes in there. Either way, whether you do it by --record-only or by figuring out the result, you spend a lot of time checking individual changesets.
but I don't mind if someone else wants to step up and learn the > intense pain that is repeated merging in Subversion. I can try and provide some help with that, but I'm not sure if it qualifies for "stepping up". I guess we could start with some IM sessions during the merges. Contact me in private for details, if you think my help can be useful.
I'm not sure if collaborative merging makes sense, as the problem isn't tips or tricks in merging (I've had merging down pat for years,) but figuring out the code that is being merged. I'll be sure to holler if I'm merging any code ou touched, though :) And of course if I get stuck with svnmerge. -- Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
_______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
