A few thoughts on foreign integration...

[John Szakmeister]

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:46 AM, John Szakmeister <john at szakmeister.net> wrote:
[snip]
> In my most recent scenario, I'm not sure even that path-based merging
> would have helped (but it most definitely would in a several other
> scenarios we face often).  The number of conflicts I got was enormous,
> so I investigated it further and found a couple of things.  First, the
> branch was created from ours, so, in this case, bzr-svn did know the
> file-ids of the tree.  However, two mistakes were made.  On our end
> the dev was re-organizing the tree and instead of using 'bzr mv', he
> nuked the tree, and then re-added the files in their new location
> (naughty, naughty, naughty).  Next, I think the other team had a bit
> of trouble merging our refactoring (svn has traditionally sucked at
> this), so I'm sure some interesting compromises were made there too.
> So when we finally go back to remedy all of this, we see that the old
> tree was deleted, and there is new "unrelated" tree.  The result is a
> tremendous amount of conflicts.

I'm going to reneg on this... it actually would have helped
tremendously.  We didn't nuke the tree, that happened in svn.  I ended
resolving 80+ conflicts that were all path issues, and nothing more.
Of ~100 conflicts, there was actually only 4 lines of change involved.
:-(  There was another 20+ that were more significant, but that's the
result of the changes, and not the mismatch between svn and bzr.

I took a quick look, and it appears the place to start adding
path-based merging support is in Merge3Merger?

-John