From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-11 14:23:09
James Sharpe wrote:
> 2008/5/6 Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]>:
>> Having an svnmerge command like in this case
>> <http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/45029> spew commentary
>> all over existing trac items like this one
>> <http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/1889>, just seems like a
>> really bad thing.
Agreed. I didn't know that was happening.
>> Is this yet another reason not to use svnmerge? Or is it operator
>> (not to pick on Eric) error that can be averted in the future? Or
>> could it be the trac comment plugin causing this, and svnmerge is
Recommended usage of svnmerge.py is to commit the merged changes using
`svn commit -F svnmerge-commit-message.txt`, where
svnmerge-commit-message.txt is a text file containing all the commit
messages for the merged changes. The file is generated by svnmerge.py.
For now, I can simply commit merged changes using `-m "blah"` instead to
avoid the trac spew.
> I'd say that its the trac plugin. Its picking up the fact that the
> bugs were closed on the branch and when it sees the comment again
> then it tries to close the bug again. Could the trac plugin be
> modified to ignore comments when the string 'svnmerge' is in the log
If the trac plugin didn't try to close bugs that were already closed, I
think the problem would go away, right?
> Interesting it didn't spam
> http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/45019though so trac may be
> doing something more complex..
> Of course this can be worked around by users if it becomes a problem
> by removing the bug numbers from the log messages, although I'd
> admit its not a convenient fix and one that'd be easy to forget given
> the workflow for svnmerge.py
-- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk