On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 05:41:03PM +, Varnau, Steve (Neoview) wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Sperling
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 5:10 AM
To: Daniel Becroft
Cc: Varnau, Steve (Neoview); users@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: Dangerous to keep re-integrated
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@elego.de]
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 9:54 AM
To: Varnau, Steve (Neoview)
Cc: Daniel Becroft; users@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: Dangerous to keep re-integrated branches alive?
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 05:41:03PM
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 06:05:26PM +, Varnau, Steve (Neoview) wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Sperling
No, the files can differ. E.g. consider what happens if the branch modifies
the very last line of a file. Now the branch is synced to trunk to prepare
it for
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@elego.de]
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 11:27 AM
To: Varnau, Steve (Neoview)
Cc: Daniel Becroft; users@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: Dangerous to keep re-integrated branches alive?
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 06:05:26PM
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 04:08:26PM +1000, Daniel Becroft wrote:
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Varnau, Steve (Neoview)
steve.var...@hp.com wrote:
Hi all,
My development group uses quite a bit of branching. I’m trying to train
folks to delete a task branch once it is integrated and
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Varnau, Steve (Neoview)
steve.var...@hp.com wrote:
Hi all,
My development group uses quite a bit of branching. I’m trying to train
folks to delete a task branch once it is integrated and create a new one for
the next task. Of course the svnbook gives the
