Re: [BOOK PATCH]

[Michael W Thelen <th...@cs.utah.edu>]

* Artis Caune <ac...@latnet.lv> [2004-04-22 06:01]:
> >Aha!  Since all branch-changes that happened between
> >revisions 341 and 405 were previously merged to the trunk, you
> >now know that you want to merge only the branch changes after
> >that: revisions 406 through HEAD.
> 
> Maybe there should be note, that we should use 'svn update' to
> *also* get revision of HEAD and then use that number in log message,
> or someone will make log message like this:
> "Merged my-calc-branch changes r341:HEAD into the trunk."
> ;)
> 
> # svn diff
> Index: ch04.xml
> ===================================================================
> --- ch04.xml    (revision 9455)
> +++ ch04.xml    (working copy)
> @@ -932,7 +932,7 @@
>  $ svn update
>  At revision 480.
> 
> -$ svn merge -r 406:480 
> http://svn.example.com/repos/calc/branches/my-calc-branch
> +$ svn merge -r 406:HEAD 
> http://svn.example.com/repos/calc/branches/my-calc-branch
>  U   integer.c
>  U   button.c
>  U   Makefile

I think it's actually clearer the way it is.  When merging, I tend to
use revision numbers rather than revision keywords since it's possible,
however unlikely, that the revision number associated with HEAD may have
changed since I ran the svn update.

-- Mike

-- 
Michael W. Thelen
We've heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards could produce the
complete works of Shakespeare; now, thanks to the Internet, we know that is
not true.       -- Robert Wilensky, speech at a 1996 conference