Merge rev from trunk to tag issues

[Tom Kielty <to...@calabrio.com>]

I am having problems merging a revision from our trunk to a tag. 

 

When we do a build we create a tag of the trunk. Then a checkout is done
of the tag.  If the build fails, the developer responsible makes the fix
commits the change to the trunk. They send an e-mail to me that says
their fix in part of rev 123 for example. I then do a merge of trunk
revision 123 and my working copy:

 

svn merge -c 123 http://svnserver/trunk@123 > merge.txt

 

I then replace all the "U      " with the working copy path in the
merge.txt file.

 

Then I do a commit 

 

svn ci --targets merge.txt -m"Update"

 

The reason I use the merge.txt is that during the commit I only want the
files I specify to be committed. I am seeing some strange results and
wanted to confirm that my approach is correct?

 

Also I am running into the situation where a user has multiple revisions
for a fix. Is there an easy way to include all rev or a range of rev's
in the above example?

 

Thanks

 

Tom

RE: Merge rev from trunk to tag issues

[Tom Kielty <to...@calabrio.com>]

Thanks Ryan for the help.

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Schmidt [mailto:subversion-2007b@ryandesign.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 5:22 PM
To: Tom Kielty
Cc: users@subversion.tigris.org
Subject: Re: Merge rev from trunk to tag issues


On Jul 11, 2007, at 17:01, Tom Kielty wrote:

> I am having problems merging a revision from our trunk to a tag.
>
>
>
> When we do a build we create a tag of the trunk. Then a checkout is  
> done of the tag.  If the build fails, the developer responsible  
> makes the fix commits the change to the trunk. They send an e-mail  
> to me that says their fix in part of rev 123 for example. I then do  
> a merge of trunk revision 123 and my working copy:
>
>
>
> svn merge -c 123 http://svnserver/trunk@123 > merge.txt
>
>
>
> I then replace all the "U      " with the working copy path in the  
> merge.txt file.
>
>
>
> Then I do a commit
>
>
>
> svn ci --targets merge.txt -m"Update"
>
>
>
> The reason I use the merge.txt is that during the commit I only  
> want the files I specify to be committed. I am seeing some strange  
> results and wanted to confirm that my approach is correct?

It should be fine to do it that way. But it should be fine also to  
just commit the entire working copy. Subversion will only transmit  
the actual differences to the server, so if those specific files are  
the only ones that have been changed, then that's all that will be  
sent to the server.

Of course, if you do have other unrelated changes in the working copy  
that you don't want to commit at the same time, then your approach  
may be better.

> Also I am running into the situation where a user has multiple  
> revisions for a fix. Is there an easy way to include all rev or a  
> range of rev's in the above example?

That should be easy, e.g.:

svn merge -c 123 http://svnserver/trunk@123 > merge.txt

svn merge -c 125 http://svnserver/trunk@125 >> merge.txt

svn merge -c 130 http://svnserver/trunk@130 >> merge.txt



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: Merge rev from trunk to tag issues

[Ryan Schmidt <su...@ryandesign.com>]

On Jul 11, 2007, at 17:01, Tom Kielty wrote:

> I am having problems merging a revision from our trunk to a tag.
>
>
>
> When we do a build we create a tag of the trunk. Then a checkout is  
> done of the tag.  If the build fails, the developer responsible  
> makes the fix commits the change to the trunk. They send an e-mail  
> to me that says their fix in part of rev 123 for example. I then do  
> a merge of trunk revision 123 and my working copy:
>
>
>
> svn merge -c 123 http://svnserver/trunk@123 > merge.txt
>
>
>
> I then replace all the “U      “ with the working copy path in the  
> merge.txt file.
>
>
>
> Then I do a commit
>
>
>
> svn ci --targets merge.txt -m"Update”
>
>
>
> The reason I use the merge.txt is that during the commit I only  
> want the files I specify to be committed. I am seeing some strange  
> results and wanted to confirm that my approach is correct?

It should be fine to do it that way. But it should be fine also to  
just commit the entire working copy. Subversion will only transmit  
the actual differences to the server, so if those specific files are  
the only ones that have been changed, then that's all that will be  
sent to the server.

Of course, if you do have other unrelated changes in the working copy  
that you don't want to commit at the same time, then your approach  
may be better.

> Also I am running into the situation where a user has multiple  
> revisions for a fix. Is there an easy way to include all rev or a  
> range of rev’s in the above example?

That should be easy, e.g.:

svn merge -c 123 http://svnserver/trunk@123 > merge.txt

svn merge -c 125 http://svnserver/trunk@125 >> merge.txt

svn merge -c 130 http://svnserver/trunk@130 >> merge.txt



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org