[cvsnt] Re: Merging branches with mergepoints

Detlef Marschall ich.ich at gmx.ch
Sat Dec 3 12:45:22 GMT 2005

Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.

Am 03.12.2005 schrieb Tony Hoyle:

> The problem is created by the fact that B2 has the wrong base.
> If you're promoting HEAD->B1->B2 then B2 should be based on B1 (or 
> possibly the same revision of HEAD).  By creating B2 out of a different 
> revision there is no possible way of retionalising it without an 
> existing mergepoint.
> You've got the situation:
> 1.3 -> B1 + changes (eg.
> 1.8 -> B2 + changes (eg

But revision 1.8 contain all merged changes from branch B1. From a
logical point of view is there no difference when merging B1 -> HEAD or
B1 -> B2, if B2 was split from revision "1.8" or later. In B2 are always
all merged changes from B1, right?
> The 'common ancestor' of both branches is 1.3, so the only possible (and 
> logical) merge of B1->B2 is the entireity of B1 onto B2.  Once a 
> mergepoint is there it fixes this as it knows where the first merge was.

Sorry, I disagree. From the logical point of view is in revision "1.8"
all changes from B1. I'm understand that this is hard to program but
that's a technical problem, not a logical.

Please excuse my poor english, it's very hard for me.


More information about the cvsnt mailing list
Download the latest CVSNT, TortosieCVS, WinCVS etc. for Windows 8 etc.
@CVSNT on Twitter   CVSNT on Facebook