Can bzr-svn merge be tracked by svn?

[Francis J. Lacoste]

On September 2, 2009, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> Hi Francis,
> 
> Francis J. Lacoste wrote:
> > Last week at Agile2009, I met a guy from a company that are using
> > feature- branch mode of development with SVN. He's using git-svn on
> > Windows and is finding it a little painful.
> >
> > He knew about bzr having tried it out last year but had a few issues
> 
> with it
> 
> > (in particular, he had trouble installing it on Windows).
> >
> > I talked to him about bzr 2.0 and all the changes we made. He seemed
> > interested to try it out again.
> >
> > One thing that he finds annoying with bzr-git is that if he merge his
> 
> feature
> 
> > branch and commit on the trunk using bzr-git, SVN doesn't recognize the
> 
> two
> 
> > SVN branches as merged. So he has still to use svn to do these merges.
> 
> I'm confused - do you perhaps mean git-svn instead of bzr-git in the
> last paragraph ?

Yes, I did.

> 
> > Do we have a similar limitation with bzr-svn?
> 
> If you did indeed mean git-svn in the paragraph above then bzr-svn
> will behave (somewhat) better. Recent versions of bzr-svn will, as
> well as storing the bzr revision parents, update the svn:merge-info
> file properties in merge commits that are pushed. Of course this
> requires that the branch that was merged in was also present in the
> Subversion repository since the merged branch is referred to by a
> path+revnum tuple.

Then I think that would work.

> 
> bzr-svn will only set these file properties, it will never try to
> convert them back to revision parents in Bazaar since most merges in
> Subversion are actually cherrypicks - and those can not be tracked in
> bzr yet.
> 

I don't know about the workflow specifics that the guy is using to know if he 
was talking about cherrypicks? But I think he was actually talking about svn 
merge, (does that qualify as a cherry-pick). 

Since we don't read that property does it mean that if I used bzr-svn to get 
the trunk and then merge the bzr branch that is already merged, bzr would re-
attempt the merge?

Thanks

-- 
Francis J. Lacoste
francis.lacoste at canonical.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20090902/e9d20f1d/attachment-0002.pgp