Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
PO
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>I do not use Subversion myself, but from the <a href="http://subversion.apache.org/docs/release-notes/1.5.html#merge-tracking" rel="nofollow noreferrer">release notes for Subversion 1.5: Merge tracking (foundational)</a> it looks like there are the following differences from how merge tracking work in full-<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed_acyclic_graph" rel="nofollow noreferrer">DAG</a> version control systems like Git or Mercurial.</p> <ul> <li><p>Merging trunk to branch is different from merging branch to trunk: for some reason merging trunk to branch requires <code>--reintegrate</code> option to <code>svn merge</code>.</p> <p>In distributed version control systems like Git or Mercurial there is no <em>technical</em> difference between trunk and branch: all branches are created equal (there might be <em>social</em> difference, though). Merging in either direction is done the same way.</p></li> <li><p>You need to provide new <code>-g</code> (<code>--use-merge-history</code>) option to <code>svn log</code> and <code>svn blame</code> to take merge tracking into account.</p> <p>In Git and Mercurial merge tracking is automatically taken into account when displaying history (log) and blame. In Git you can request to follow first parent only with <code>--first-parent</code> (I guess similar option exists also for Mercurial) to "discard" merge tracking info in <code>git log</code>.</p></li> <li><p>From what I understand <code>svn:mergeinfo</code> property stores per-path information about conflicts (Subversion is changeset-based), while in Git and Mercurial it is simply commit objects that can have more than one parent.</p></li> <li><p><em>"Known Issues"</em> subsection for merge tracking in Subversion suggests that repeated / cyclic / reflective merge might not work properly. It means that with the following histories second merge might not do the right thing ('A' can be trunk or branch, and 'B' can be branch or trunk, respectively): </p> <pre> *---*---x---*---y---*---*---*---M2 &lt;-- A \ \ / --*----M1---*---*---/ &lt;-- B </pre> <p>In the case the above ASCII-art gets broken: Branch 'B' is created (forked) from branch 'A' at revision 'x', then later branch 'A' is merged at revision 'y' into branch 'B' as merge 'M1', and finally branch 'B' is merged into branch 'A' as merge 'M2'. </p> <pre> *---*---x---*-----M1--*---*---M2 &lt;-- A \ / / \-*---y---*---*---/ &lt;-- B </pre> <p>In the case the above ASCII-art gets broken: Branch 'B' is created (forked) from branch 'A' at revision 'x', it is merged into branch 'A' at 'y' as 'M1', and later merged again into branch 'A' as 'M2'.</p></li> <li><p>Subversion might not support advanced case of <a href="http://revctrl.org/CrissCrossMerge" rel="nofollow noreferrer">criss-cross merge</a>.</p> <pre> *---b-----B1--M1--*---M3 \ \ / / \ X / \ / \ / \--B2--M2--* </pre> <p>Git handles this situation just fine in practice using "recursive" merge strategy. I am not sure about Mercurial.</p></li> <li><p>In <em>"Known Issues"</em> there is warning that merge tracking migh not work with file renames, e.g. when one side renames file (and perhaps modifies it), and second side modifies file without renaming (under old name).</p> <p>Both Git and Mercurial handle such case just fine in practice: Git using <strong>rename detection</strong>, Mercurial using <strong>rename tracking</strong>.</p></li> </ul> <p>HTH</p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POMerging: Hg/Git vs. SVN
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. PTAnswer
    1. USJack Miller
    1. USJakub Narębski
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POMerging: Hg/Git vs. SVN
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. COsomehow (error in Markdown parser?) the part after `<pre>...</pre>` block is not indented as it should be...
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USJakub Narębski
    2. CO+1 for the many detailed examples. I don't yet understand why the example in the first ascii-art might cause problems. it looks like the standard way to treat feature branches: assume A is the trunk, B is a feature branch. you merge weekly from A to B and when you're done with the feature you merge everything from B to A and then delete B. that has always worked for me. have i misunderstood the diagram?
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USstmax
    3. CONote that I don't know (I have not checked) that examples given above **really give problems in Subversion**. Renames and criss-cross merge are real problem in SVN, I think.
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USJakub Narębski
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload