Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 12:37, Philip Martin <philip.mar...@wandisco.com> > wrote: >> To make the new single-txn delete pass the regression tests I had to >> make it leave ACTUAL_NODE rows with tree conflicts. This preserved the >> behaviour of the old per-node delete code, but I'm wondering if that is >> the correct thing to do. I suspect that the current behaviour is, in >> part at least, accidental--I think is stems from the time when tree >> conflicts were stored on the parent node and so deleting a conflicted >> node would leave the tree conflict unless the parent node was also >> modified. >> >> The current behaviour is that if I have a node in conflict: >> >> $ svn st wc >> R C wc/A/f >> > local add, incoming add upon update >> Summary of conflicts: >> Tree conflicts: 1 >> >> and I delete the conflicted node: >> >> $ svn rm --force wc/A/f >> D wc/A/f >> >> it remains in conflict: >> >> $ svn st wc >> D C wc/A/f >> > local add, incoming add upon update >> Summary of conflicts: >> Tree conflicts: 1 >> >> I'd like to change this so that delete removes the ACTUAL_NODE row and >> thus automatically resolves the conflict. >> >> Anybody see any problems that would arise? > > I think the conflict should turn into "local delete, incoming add upon > update".
I suppose that would make the conflict more accurate, but is it better than simply resolving the conflict? > >> It also solves one of the orphaned ACTUAL_NODE problems: if the >> conflicted node is within an added tree then deleting the tree and >> leaving the ACTUAL_NODE row could result in an ACTUAL_NODE that has no >> parents. > > That would still be a "local delete, incoming add upon update". Not > sure whether that would be located at the child, or at the deleted > ancestor. The update editor has a notion of conflicted parents, and > this seems to follow that case. Again, is that better than resolving the conflict? We would have to move the conflict, the wc code barely handles actual-only nodes, I expect if will do even worse on actual-only nodes that don't have parents. -- Philip
