Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.
Bo Berglund wrote: >>Hm... wouldn't it make sense for a branch to "inherit" all mergepoints from >>the branch it was created from (prior to its creation)? So that, in this >>case, B2 "knew" about (and considered) all mergepoints of HEAD up to 1.8? >>Seems logical to me. I don't see a reason why it shouldn't. > > Definitely *NOT*!!!! > Such a presupposition from the server would completely ruin any > possibilities of having several *independent* branches off of TRUNK... I don't see why. Maybe you misunderstood my suggestion. > If you create a branch off a certain branchpoint, weather on TRUNK or > another branch, you assume that the code you write will be exactly > based on the branchpoint plus your edits. I agree. I don't think that my suggestion would change that. > Having the server automerge stuff that happens on TRUNK while you are > working on the branch will completely ruin this isolation, which is why > you create a branch in the first place... I do not understand how you see something getting "automerged". The only thing I said is that if I create a branch B2 of HEAD at revision 1.8 and there is a merge point for a merge from B1 to HEAD at revision 1.6, the branch B2 could be aware of that merge point, for future merges from B1 to B2. How would that awareness result in something getting "automerged"? The only result of this awareness would be that when you do the first merge from B1 to B2, B2 knows that its root includes already this merge from B1 to HEAD that happened prior to creating B2. > In my view, the only allowed way for edits on TRUNK *after* the > branchpoint to get into my branch code is to explicitly give a command > to merge in for example HEAD *into* my branch. Agreed. I don't see how this would get changed with the branch being aware of merge points (with other branches, of course) before the branch root. This whole thing was not about edits to HEAD. > If this is done I believe CVSNT does a good job of book-keeping using > the mergepoints. You will get one pointing from TRUNK into your branch > and the next time you merge the backtracking will only go as far as > this mergepoint. Note that I am /not/ talking about merges between HEAD and B2 (in the example). These would continue to work as before, as they are not affected by merge points on HEAD before the root of branch B2 (because those are of course with other branches). Those merge points do influence merges between the branch B2 and other branches, though, like in the OP's case. > The proper way is: As I see it, this sequence is about something completely different than I (and the OP) was talking about. Gerhard