[Svnmerge] [PATCH] Bidirectional patch take 2

[Giovanni Bajo]

Raman Gupta <rocketraman at fastmail.fm> wrote:

>> The only issue here is that we're going to overwrite the
>> svnmerge-integrated property *only*, *not* other properties. With your
fix
>> you're reverting other property changes. This is definitely incorrect:
>> it's better to leave the property in a conflicted state and let the user
>> decide.
>
> Hmm, yes. I think it might still be worth checking the directory to see
> if there are any other non-svnmerge properties (before and after the
> merge). If there are no other properties, then go ahead and revert, and
> if there are, leave it with the conflict. This would at least prevent
> the spurious property conflict sometimes. What do you think?  Can anyone
> think of another solution?

This might work. It's a little too brainy so might have spurious side
effects, but I can see the conflicts get annoying fast. If you care
implementing it, I think it's fine.
-- 
Giovanni Bajo