[svnmerge] question about the integrated and avail subcommands

[Madan U S]

On Wednesday 05 Apr 2006 6:40 pm, Madan U S wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 Apr 2006 6:28 pm, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> > Madan U S <madan at collab.net> wrote:
> > >    Why do the 'svnmerge integrated' and 'svnmerge avail' commands
> > > require
> >
> > a
> >
> > > head option(in case the branch is tracked against more than one other
> > > branch)?
> > >
> > >    Why cant it list the integrated and available options against all
> > > heads available?
> >
> > "avail" is a remote operation that can take even several minutes on large
> > repositories, so I don't think we should be slower by default.
> > "integrated" is a local opeartion, so it'd make more sense, but there is
> > a consistency issue then.
>
> you know, what we need is 'svnmerge status'!!!

'svnmerge status' should list the following...

/branches/branch1:
r8-12: Merged by username on date at r13
r15: Merged by username on date at r18
r16: Hand merged by username on date at r19

Empty revisions on /branches/branch1: r6-7,r13, r18-19
Unmerged revisions on /branches/branch1: r21-22, r24, r26

/branches/branch2:
r6: Merged by username on date at r7
r14: Hand merged by username on date at r20

Empty revisions on /branches/branch2: r7-13, r15-16, r18-20
Unmerged revisions on /branches/branch2: r23, r25


   Have I missed something here? (maybe blocked revisions should be listed here too  :?

Regards,
Madan.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/svnmerge/attachments/20060405/05411e3f/attachment.htm