|Merge conflicts not handled by compare view [message #492703]
||Wed, 21 October 2009 13:20
| Ben Turner
Registered: July 2009
I've got to admit, I don't feel as convinced by Subversive's handling of switching and merging as I do of other tools (TortoiseSVN) but I would like to use it more to keep all the functions in the one IDE - external tools require eclipse refreshes which can take a long time.|
I am using v1.6 subversion libraries for this example.
The GUI issue I have is when merging from a developer / feature branch back to trunk. Previously, I had merged from trunk to this branch, to ensure my developer changes worked with the fully up to date trunk code, and now I was merging my changes back onto trunk.
When I do this through TortoiseSVN (Reintegrate a branch -> From URL = branch URL) I get told about 22 files that were merged, and one conflict, which is a simple one line difference. Simple.
Doing the same merge via Subversive (One URL tab, URL = branch URL, Revisions = start from copy) I get told about 4-5 conflicts though ? And some of the conflicts contain the merge text (.working, .merge-right.r#### and ====== etc...) - please see the attached image
My main question here is why I see the underlying "merge differences" text, where as with Tortoise SVN I see a nice three-way compare dialog to resolve conflicts ? I recall Eclipse CVS hiding the "underlying conflict text" and presenting a GUI for this, so I guess I would be quite surprised if Subversive does not have a similar option ?
Or was my merging flawed ? I did a one URL merge, should it have been a two URL merge ? Also I did not select Reversed Merge - should I have done that ? I did try other options, but found the merge's to have similar discrepancies from what was "expected" (e.g. more conflicts), and next to no GUI assistance with conflict resolution - which added up to a desire to not use subversive to merge ever again !
Please can someone assist me with this, and help me regain my trust of Subversive merging !!!
[Updated on: Wed, 21 October 2009 13:21]
Report message to a moderator
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.01884 seconds