Hi
I was told that I could use the following syntax to merge different
revisions at once:
svn merge [source svn location] -c 444 -c 469 -c 480
However, when I tried using this syntax I found out that all merges
are done against the initial state of the current folder which
resulted in
svn merge [source svn location] -c 444,469,480
-Original Message-
From: emerson [mailto:echofloripa.y...@gmail.com]
Sent: 05 July 2010 17:38
To: Andy Levy; users@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: Applying multiple commits done to a branch to
another branch
Hi
I was told
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 05:38, emerson echofloripa.y...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Guys
Thanks for the answers.
First Andy, yes, we put more than the story code on the commits :)
We are using svn 1.4.4 ont he server, so to be able to keep track of
the ancestors logs we will probably need to
Hi
We are moving from a single trunk to a layered approach, with a
unstable (same as the old trunk), and a stable branch. The code should
be promoted to the stable branch only when a certain story would be
done (finished and tested).
When creating the story, several commits might had been
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 14:06, emerson echofloripa.y...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
We are moving from a single trunk to a layered approach, with a
unstable (same as the old trunk), and a stable branch. The code should
be promoted to the stable branch only when a certain story would be
done
Hi
We are moving from a single trunk to a layered approach, with a
unstable (same as the old trunk), and a stable branch. The code should
be promoted to the stable branch only when a certain story would be
done (finished and tested).
When creating the story, several commits might had been
You're describing a normal usage of merging.
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.html
You don't want to redo all those commit messages, you want the merge
to be aware of the history behind everything that's been done (which,
if you're using 1.5 or later, is taken care
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 14:20, Bob Archer bob.arc...@amsi.com wrote:
You're describing a normal usage of merging.
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.html
You don't want to redo all those commit messages, you want the merge
to be aware of the history behind everything
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 4:20 AM, Bob Archer bob.arc...@amsi.com wrote:
You're describing a normal usage of merging.
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.html
You don't want to redo all those commit messages, you want the merge
to be aware of the history behind everything
