[Svnmerge] [PATCH] Eliminate spurious svnmerge-integrated property conflicts

[Alan Barrett]

On Fri, 08 Dec 2006, Raman Gupta wrote:
> > Consider this circular merging model:
> 
> could someone provide some uses cases for doing this type of
> graph merging?

The use case I described on 14 July 2006 had three
branches with circular merging.  The archives at
http://www.orcaware.com/pipermail/svnmerge/ seem to be missing the month
of July, and parts of June and August, so I can't point to an archived
copy of my message.  Here's the message again:

--------

If you have two branches, A and B, and if you merge A -> B and B -> A,
then svnmerge.py with the --bidirectional flag can handle it.  But if
you have three branches, A, B, and C, and if you merge A -> B, B -> C,
and C -> A, then svnmerge.py can't handle it.  It would be nice if
somebody could fix that (sorry, it won't be me).

Use case:

    I have a project with three branches, "dev", "test", and "prod".
    Usually, the development team commits changes to the dev branch,
    then merges to the test branch.  The testing team tests the changes,
    then merges to the prod branch.  The production team updates the
    production system from the prod branch.  svnmerge handles all this
    just fine.

    Occasionally, changes are made on the production system, and
    committed to the prod branch.  It would be nice if svnmerge could
    help with merging those changes back to the dev branch.

I attach a script to demonstrate the problem.   [script deleted from
this copy]

--apb (Alan Barrett)