You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@subversion.apache.org by Phillip Seaver <gt...@gmail.com> on 2014/09/22 17:18:03 UTC

Starting to use vendor branch with existing code

We are using vendor branches for most third-party libraries, but there are
a few projects in our source tree that haven't been brought in via vendor
branches.  Some of them have local modifications, too.

Is there a recommended way to start using vendor branches with them?  For
one unmodified project, I deleted the directory and copied it over from the
vendor branch, but that caused a (hopefully) one-time problem with tree
conflicts.  We had to update to the revision with the delete then update to
head in order to avoid the conflict.

Thanks,

Phillip

Re: Starting to use vendor branch with existing code

Posted by Eric Johnson <er...@tibco.com>.
If I'm not mistaken, this sounds like a perfect use for the least-used form
of the merge command.

Specifically, create the vendor folder (for simplicity, call this location
"A")
Move your existing version of the vendored item (call this location B) to a
new location (location C).
Copy the vendor item to location B (svn copy A B)
Check out working copy of B.
Three way merge changes between A & C onto the working copy of B. (svn
merge A C .)
Resolve conflicts & commit.
Delete location C.

Now you have a folder at location B which is derived from your vendor
folder at A.

Eric

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Phillip Seaver <gt...@gmail.com> wrote:

> We are using vendor branches for most third-party libraries, but there are
> a few projects in our source tree that haven't been brought in via vendor
> branches.  Some of them have local modifications, too.
>
> Is there a recommended way to start using vendor branches with them?  For
> one unmodified project, I deleted the directory and copied it over from the
> vendor branch, but that caused a (hopefully) one-time problem with tree
> conflicts.  We had to update to the revision with the delete then update to
> head in order to avoid the conflict.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Phillip
>