On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 01:34:06PM -0000, julianf...@apache.org wrote: > Author: julianfoad > Date: Wed Jan 30 13:34:06 2013 > New Revision: 1440411 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1440411&view=rev > Log: > Make the interactive conflict resolver code more table-driven: the responses > that simply choose a return value now get it from the table. Make the 'help' > response uniformly available with all four types of conflicts. > > * subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c > (resolver_option_t): Add a 'choice' field. > (text_conflict_options, prop_conflict_options, > obstructed_add_options, tree_conflict_options): Add the simple responses > in the new column. > (prompt_user): New function. > (handle_text_conflict, handle_prop_conflict, > handle_tree_conflict, handle_obstructed_add): Factor out the prompting > and choosing of simple responses. > > Modified: > subversion/trunk/subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c
Hi Julian, nice work! I have one question about this that I've been wanting to ask for a while, see below. > Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c?rev=1440411&r1=1440410&r2=1440411&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- subversion/trunk/subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c (original) > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c Wed Jan 30 13:34:06 > 2013 > /* Resolver options for a tree conflict */ > static const resolver_option_t tree_conflict_options[] = > { > - { "p", "postpone", N_("resolve the conflict later") }, > - { "r", "resolved", N_("accept current working copy state") }, > - { "mc", "mine-conflict", N_("prefer local change") }, > - { "tc", "theirs-conflict", N_("prefer incoming change") }, > - { "h", "show help", N_("show this help") }, > + { "p", "postpone", N_("resolve the conflict later"), > + svn_wc_conflict_choose_postpone }, > + { "r", "resolved", N_("accept current working copy state"), > + svn_wc_conflict_choose_merged }, > + { "mc", "mine-conflict", N_("prefer local change"), > + svn_wc_conflict_choose_mine_conflict }, > + { "tc", "theirs-conflict", N_("prefer incoming change"), > + svn_wc_conflict_choose_theirs_conflict }, > + { "h", "help", N_("show this help (also '?')"), -1 }, > { NULL } > }; What I would like here is the ability to plug in custom descriptions to better describe the actual effect of some options in particular tree conflict scenarios. Consider the current update-move work. There, if the user chooses 'mc' at the conflict prompt, we apply the update to the moved-away subtree. And if the user chooses 'tc', we break the move and leave the copied half of the move as a simple copy (rather than as a move). Additionally, the delete-half can either be left deleted or be reverted so that changes brought in by the update for the delete-half become visible in the working copy. So I would like to describe more clearly what will happen if the user picks one of these options. Something like: (mc) mine-conflict - apply the update to the move destination (tc) theirs-conflict - transform the move into a copy and leave the move source deleted (tf) theirs-full - transform the move into a copy and revert deletion of the move source I think the best way of doing this would be to have a special tree conflict options table that overrides the generic table in certain cases. What do you think?
