move branch->trunk or merge?

[Oliver Betz <li...@gmx.net>]

Hi all,

what is the appropriate method if there were only minor changes in 
the trunk, but many changes in a branch all to be merged to the 
trunk:

I could merge the few trunk changes to the branch and move (rename) 
the branch to the trunk, resulting in much less (duplicate) merging,

or make a big merge branch -> trunk. In this case I wonder whether I 
should repeat all commit comments or only say "merged all changes of 
branch foo".

As a SVN newbie I can't see what's better (safe, clear, efficient).

Any comments?

TIA,

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen


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

Re: move branch->trunk or merge?

[Paul Koning <pk...@equallogic.com>]

>>>>> "Oliver" == Oliver Betz <li...@gmx.net> writes:

 Oliver> Would you also repeat all commit comments or only say "merged
 Oliver> all changes of branch...", and the curious had to look at the
 Oliver> branch commit comments to see what happened?

I would just say "merged from branch rev xxx".  Yes, anyone who needs
to know the details (which might well be thousands of lines of text)
can use the svn log command...

    paul


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

Re: move branch->trunk or merge?

[Oliver Betz <li...@gmx.net>]

Paul Koning <pk...@equallogic.com> wrote:

[move branch to trunk or merge?]

> Moving a branch to trunk seems like a bad idea, that confuses the
> picture quite badly.  I like my revision trees to be trees, not
> graphs... :-)

Ack, that was also my objection.

So I commit all changes done earlier in the branch.

Would you also repeat all commit comments or only say "merged all 
changes of branch...", and the curious had to look at the branch 
commit comments to see what happened?

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen


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

Re: move branch->trunk or merge?

[Paul Koning <pk...@equallogic.com>]

>>>>> "Oliver" == Oliver Betz <li...@gmx.net> writes:

 Oliver> Hi all, what is the appropriate method if there were only
 Oliver> minor changes in the trunk, but many changes in a branch all
 Oliver> to be merged to the trunk:

 Oliver> I could merge the few trunk changes to the branch and move
 Oliver> (rename) the branch to the trunk, resulting in much less
 Oliver> (duplicate) merging,

 Oliver> or make a big merge branch -> trunk. In this case I wonder
 Oliver> whether I should repeat all commit comments or only say
 Oliver> "merged all changes of branch foo".

 Oliver> As a SVN newbie I can't see what's better (safe, clear,
 Oliver> efficient).

I'm an SVN newbie too.  But anyway...

If one side has few changes, then a merge should be easy.  It
shouldn't matter whether you merge branch to trunk or trunk to
branch. 

So I would get myself a clean working directory of the trunk, merge
the branch to it, and do one commit.

Moving a branch to trunk seems like a bad idea, that confuses the
picture quite badly.  I like my revision trees to be trees, not
graphs... :-)

	  paul


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