On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:08 AM, James Hanley <jhan...@dgtlrift.com> wrote: > There's no interest/descending/rebuttal opinion to this? Should I > create a enhancement ticket? I thought that this was the medium to > first propose changes/enhancements for discussion.
My 2 cents would be that I do not see the need or value. The ls command is only showing a single version of each path, I do not see how you could show merge info. If you want to see the history of a path, then use the svn log -g command. > I'm raising the issue that there should be an option to include merge > information of an "ls -v" in much the same way that "svn blame" > supports it. Although, I can easily use "svn blame -g" to find out who > /originally/ added a file, it's not intuitive, the more natural method > (IMHO) is to use "svn ls -v -g" to give the info on who originally > added/modified a file, not necessarily the last to merge the new file. What if the most recent change to the file was a regular commit, but the previous change was the merge? What if the last change was the commit of a merge but there were 4 different revisions by 4 different authors. I do not see how ls is supposed to represent that. > Essentially, I'm looking for merge history blame on a path structure > in the same way that I can get merge history blame on an individual > file contents. The command to inspect the history of a path is svn log, not svn ls. Add the -g option to log if you want to include merge information. -- Thanks Mark Phippard http://markphip.blogspot.com/
