On 05/25/2011 07:45 AM, Stephen Butler wrote: > Hi David, > > Attached is a reproduction script. I could reproduce the corrupted working > copy in 1.6.16. > > With 1.7 (r1127008), the corruption doesn't occur, but there's still a bug: > 'svn status' displays bar.java (as deleted) after the merge. The revert of > bar.java has no effect. > > Anyway, making local changes to a working copy just to avoid tree > conflicts, is a sign that Subversion's conflict resolution is lacking. > There's > no way to tell the merge command to resolve add-vs-add tree conflicts by > merging the trees. > > I guess we need 'svn merge --accept theirs-conflict' (or mine-conflict) to > apply to tree conflicts. That would be useful for 'svn update', too. This > falls under issue 3144: > > http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3144 > "interactive conflict resolution does not know about tree-conflicts" > > Note: At the end of the script I include an alternate workaround: 'svn copy > ^/trunk/config/foo' to the branch. This has the advantage of preserving > each file's history. > > > > Steve >
Excellent, Steve. I thought about the 'theirs-conflict' option to resolve this as well. Hope my problem can result in some improvements to svn. :) David
