Re: [PATCH] Issue #3919: fix for spurious property conflict during merge

2011-06-15 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Brian Neal wrote on Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 14:22:52 -0500: > I probably not would have been able to write the initial patch without > it. Once I had all the pre-requisite build tools installed in Ubuntu, apt-get build-dep subversion ? > all I had to do was type "make" and watch it go to town. It wa

Re: [PATCH] Issue #3919: fix for spurious property conflict during merge

2011-06-15 Thread Brian Neal
Hi Stefan - On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > Committed in r1136063. Thank you! > >> > Also, did you already run the regression tests with your patch ("make >> > check")? My suggestion might affect the output of 'svn' so tests would >> > need to be run again (but I wil

Re: [PATCH] Issue #3919: fix for spurious property conflict during merge

2011-06-15 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 07:41:47AM -0500, Brian Neal wrote: > > Instead of doing nothing, I think this should set the *state to 'merged' > > using > > > >        set_prop_merge_state(state, svn_wc_notify_state_merged); > > > > Just like apply_single_prop_add() already does. > > > > Do you agree? If

Re: [PATCH] Issue #3919: fix for spurious property conflict during merge

2011-06-15 Thread Philip Martin
Brian Neal writes: > I was wondering if you had unit/regression tests > but I did not see anything about that in the docs, although it is > quite possible I missed it. http://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/building.html#automated-tests Short answer 'make check'. -- Philip

Re: [PATCH] Issue #3919: fix for spurious property conflict during merge

2011-06-15 Thread Brian Neal
Hi Stefan, > thanks for this patch. > > I have one suggestion: > > [...] > > Instead of doing nothing, I think this should set the *state to 'merged' > using > >        set_prop_merge_state(state, svn_wc_notify_state_merged); > > Just like apply_single_prop_add() already does. > > Do you agree? If

Re: [PATCH] Issue #3919: fix for spurious property conflict during merge

2011-06-15 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 03:05:59PM -0500, Brian Neal wrote: > Hello - > > Attached is a patch for issue #3919 [1]. Please review when you have a > chance. Thanks! > > Possible commit message: > > [[[ > Fix issue #3919. During a merge of a property, add a check against the > incoming new property

Re: [PATCH] Issue #3919: fix for spurious property conflict during merge

2011-06-12 Thread Brian Neal
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 11:36 PM, noorul Islam. Kamal Malmiyoda wrote: > >> > > I think conditions can be combined to form one "if" statement without "else > if". > > Thanks and Regards > Noorul Hello - I'm not sure I follow you, can you please explain a bit more? I'm not sure how you could ca

Re: [PATCH] Issue #3919: fix for spurious property conflict during merge

2011-06-11 Thread noorul Islam. Kamal Malmiyoda
On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:36 AM, "Brian Neal" wrote: > Hello - > > Attached is a patch for issue #3919 [1]. Please review when you have a > chance. Thanks! > > Possible commit message: > > [[[ > Fix issue #3919. During a merge of a property, add a check against the > incoming new property value

[PATCH] Issue #3919: fix for spurious property conflict during merge

2011-06-11 Thread Brian Neal
Hello - Attached is a patch for issue #3919 [1]. Please review when you have a chance. Thanks! Possible commit message: [[[ Fix issue #3919. During a merge of a property, add a check against the incoming new property value and the working copy value. If they already match, then the merge trivial