On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Julian Foad
> wrote:
>> Thanks Paul.
>>
>> Paul Burba wrote:
>>
>>> Julian Foad wrote:
Here's a patch to reject silly merge attempts, which up to now give
silly results.
This does not app
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Thanks Paul.
>
> Paul Burba wrote:
>
>> Julian Foad wrote:
>>> Here's a patch to reject silly merge attempts, which up to now give
>>> silly results.
>>>
>>> This does not apply to all merges (general 2-URL and cherry-pick
>>> merges), but th
On 12/15/2011 07:53 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> This "sync merge from my own history" operation seems bogus. I notice
> that (without my patch) it merges changes from the future *and* records
> mergeinfo
> for them. Surely we didn't ever intend that?
Subversion has supported "sync merge from my own
Thanks Paul.
Paul Burba wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote:
>> Here's a patch to reject silly merge attempts, which up to now give
>> silly results.
>>
>> This does not apply to all merges (general 2-URL and cherry-pick
>> merges), but the commonly used 'sync' and 'reintegrate' forms of
>> merge on
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Here's a patch to reject silly merge attempts, which up to now give silly
> results.
>
> This does not apply to all merges (general 2-URL and cherry-pick merges), but
> the commonly used 'sync' and 'reintegrate' forms of merge only make sense
Here's a patch to reject silly merge attempts, which up to now give silly
results.
This does not apply to all merges (general 2-URL and cherry-pick merges), but
the commonly used 'sync' and 'reintegrate' forms of merge only make sense when
the source and target 'branches' are related (have a c
6 matches
Mail list logo