You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@subversion.apache.org by Shaun Pinney <sh...@bil.konicaminolta.us> on 2009/08/04 23:26:07 UTC
Branch on change feature?
Hi all,
Does Subversion provide a 'branch-on-change' or 'deferred branch' feature?
For example, if I have a directory 'A' in the repository can I create a
duplicate directory 'B' which transparently tracks the contents/revisions in
'A' so that commits to 'A' are seen by updates to 'B' and, when a commit
occurs to a file in 'B', the file branches and no longer tracks 'A'? This
is paraphrased from a request I heard earlier today.
Thanks,
Shaun
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=2380222
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org].
Re: Branch on change feature?
Posted by Ryan Schmidt <su...@ryandesign.com>.
On Aug 4, 2009, at 18:26, Shaun Pinney wrote:
> Does Subversion provide a 'branch-on-change' or 'deferred branch'
> feature?
> For example, if I have a directory 'A' in the repository can I
> create a
> duplicate directory 'B' which transparently tracks the contents/
> revisions in
> 'A' so that commits to 'A' are seen by updates to 'B' and, when a
> commit
> occurs to a file in 'B', the file branches and no longer tracks
> 'A'? This
> is paraphrased from a request I heard earlier today.
Not in that form, no. If you create branch B, it is a copy of A, and
separate from A. Changes made to A stay in A, changes made to B stay
in B. If you want to bring changes from A to B or vice versa, you
must explicitly use the "svn merge" command.
If you already know now that you aren't going to make changes to B
until later, you could wait until that time to create B, to save
yourself from having to do an initial merge.
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=2380233
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org].
RE: Branch on change feature?
Posted by Shaun Pinney <sh...@bil.konicaminolta.us>.
Thanks Greg and Ryan. I think the branch and manually merge option will
work pretty well for us. And honestly, I'm a bit relieved there's only a
manual merge option available :). We'll be trying this out soon.
Cheers,
Shaun
-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Troxel [mailto:gdt@ir.bbn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 5:04 PM
To: Shaun Pinney
Cc: users@subversion.tigris.org
Subject: Re: Branch on change feature?
Shaun Pinney <sh...@bil.konicaminolta.us> writes:
> Does Subversion provide a 'branch-on-change' or 'deferred branch' feature?
> For example, if I have a directory 'A' in the repository can I create a
> duplicate directory 'B' which transparently tracks the contents/revisions
in
> 'A' so that commits to 'A' are seen by updates to 'B' and, when a commit
> occurs to a file in 'B', the file branches and no longer tracks 'A'? This
> is paraphrased from a request I heard earlier today.
No.
But, if you do
svn copy foo/branches/A /foo/branches/B
and then periodically go to B and do 'svn merge foo/branches/A' you will
get sort of what you want, except that changes to files in A will still
try to be merged to B.
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=23
80228
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail:
[users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org].
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=2380248
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org].
Re: Branch on change feature?
Posted by Greg Troxel <gd...@ir.bbn.com>.
Shaun Pinney <sh...@bil.konicaminolta.us> writes:
> Does Subversion provide a 'branch-on-change' or 'deferred branch' feature?
> For example, if I have a directory 'A' in the repository can I create a
> duplicate directory 'B' which transparently tracks the contents/revisions in
> 'A' so that commits to 'A' are seen by updates to 'B' and, when a commit
> occurs to a file in 'B', the file branches and no longer tracks 'A'? This
> is paraphrased from a request I heard earlier today.
No.
But, if you do
svn copy foo/branches/A /foo/branches/B
and then periodically go to B and do 'svn merge foo/branches/A' you will
get sort of what you want, except that changes to files in A will still
try to be merged to B.
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=2380228
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org].