Davey Shafik wrote:
More importantly, the branch/merge support in SVN is limited to
temporary feature/bug branches. You branch, *complete* the feature/bug
fix, and then merge it in. After that, if you decide to carry on in your
branch, SVN's merge tracking cannot handle the tracking of changes.
On 17/07/09 12:24 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
...
also using merge tracking is only fun if everybody does it .. because if
only some people use it .. they first have to figure out which things
have not been merged via svn merge, as svn merge updates its metadata.
when merging you can either mark
On 17.07.2009, at 19:40, Jeff Griffiths wrote:
On 17/07/09 8:31 AM, Davey Shafik wrote:
...
More importantly, the branch/merge support in SVN is limited to
temporary feature/bug branches. You branch, *complete* the feature/
bug
fix, and then merge it in. After that, if you decide to carry on
On 17/07/09 8:31 AM, Davey Shafik wrote:
...
More importantly, the branch/merge support in SVN is limited to
temporary feature/bug branches. You branch, *complete* the feature/bug
fix, and then merge it in. After that, if you decide to carry on in your
branch, SVN's merge tracking cannot handle t
On Jul 16, 2009, at 08:01 PM, shire wrote:
Pierre Joye wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:45 AM, shire wrote:
Jani Taskinen wrote:
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
One of the benefits of svn is that we can do cross-branch commit
pretty
easily now and thus avoid multiple similar commits with annoying
On 07/17/2009 01:24 AM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
One of the benefits of svn is that we can do cross-branch commit pretty
easily now and thus avoid multiple similar commits with annoying MFH/MFB
commit log messages that are hard to track.
I did a commit today on all 3 branches
Pierre Joye wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:45 AM, shire wrote:
Jani Taskinen wrote:
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
One of the benefits of svn is that we can do cross-branch commit pretty
easily now and thus avoid multiple similar commits with annoying MFH/MFB
commit log messages that are hard to tr
On 2009-07-16, Pierre Joye wrote:
> I doubt any tools can really help to automatically help to merge
> changes from one branch to another (in php). However there are many
> very good merging tools (with UI) out there to ease this process
> (meld, winmerge, etc.).
In that case it's more that if we
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:45 AM, shire wrote:
> Jani Taskinen wrote:
>>
>> Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>>>
>>> One of the benefits of svn is that we can do cross-branch commit pretty
>>> easily now and thus avoid multiple similar commits with annoying MFH/MFB
>>> commit log messages that are hard to tra
Jeff Griffiths wrote:
On 16/07/09 3:45 PM, shire wrote:
...
Do we have a long-term plan of using actual merge commands/tools to
merge our branches rather than duplicating commits or manually merging?
I think this could speed up development and allow us to have more
control over releases, version
On 16/07/09 3:45 PM, shire wrote:
...
Do we have a long-term plan of using actual merge commands/tools to
merge our branches rather than duplicating commits or manually merging?
I think this could speed up development and allow us to have more
control over releases, versions, etc. I've seen cases
Jani Taskinen wrote:
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
One of the benefits of svn is that we can do cross-branch commit pretty
easily now and thus avoid multiple similar commits with annoying MFH/MFB
commit log messages that are hard to track.
I did a commit today on all 3 branches and it worked fine exce
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
One of the benefits of svn is that we can do cross-branch commit pretty
easily now and thus avoid multiple similar commits with annoying MFH/MFB
commit log messages that are hard to track.
I did a commit today on all 3 branches and it worked fine except for the fact
that
13 matches
Mail list logo
