How to merge 'already merged' revisions? - tortoisesvn

I've merged a few revisions from one branch to the trunk and committed them. Then I've found there was an issue with this merge so I've reverted it back and committed the revert.
Now after I've fixed everything I want to merge these revisions again. But Tortoise doesn't let me do this, it says "already merged" and doesn't want to apply files to the local copy. What am I doing wrong?

Subversion merge tracking is not particularly sophisticated. You just get a versioned property called svn:mergeinfo in the top-level directory where you apply merges that looks like this:
You possibly forgot to revert the property change (you can verify that in the SVN Show log dialog).
You may be able to fix it by reverting the property change from e.g. the log (right click and Revert changes from this revision) but, if the GUI gets on the way, you can also edit the property yourself:

Related

How does Tortoise's non recursive commit work?

I've checked out a copy of the SVN branch (my branch) locally to which I've merged from a different branch (which has a completely different folder structure). So basically there are a lot of deletions (of old files) and additions (of new files).
When I try to commit the merge to the repository (to my branch), Tortoise says
This commit is not recursive, and there are moved/renamed folders selected for commit. Such moves/renames are always performed recursively in the repository. Do you want to commit anyway?
Is it fine to proceed with this commit? If not, what should I do so that there's no problem?
Also, for some files that I've added, I've made changes after adding (if this affects the nature).
Found by Google how to fix it: press F5 in the commit window (not in the "warning popup")
See http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=757&dsMessageId=2831045 for details.
On 26.08.2011 22:39, Ryan J Ollos wrote:
For several months now I've been seeing the following dialog box appear when
initiating Commit. It frequently happens when attempting to commit following
a merge.
The thing I have noticed lately however is that if I Cancel and then
manually refresh the file list (F5), I don't see the message again when
initiating the commit a second time. The commit seems to succeed fine and
with no further problems.
The commit dialog monitors the working copy in a background thread for
change notifications. Such notifications are sent by the OS in case
files are modified/moved/renamed/...
If such a notification is received, the commit dialog first does a few
checks so it can drop most of them. If the notification indicates that a
file that is not checked and not visible in the commit dialog has
somehow changed, it switches back to non-recursive committing.
That's because if you have e.g. a file open in another editor and save
your changes while the commit dialog is open, then that file would get
committed as well even though you haven't checked it in the commit
dialog (it doesn't show up until you refresh the dialog with F5).
So if you see that warning dialog often, please check if there's another
tool/app running which modifies files in your working copy.
And as you noticed: if you hit F5, that 'non-recursive flag' is reset
because after a refresh, you see all the files again - even the ones you
modified after you started the dialog.
Stefan
I had the same issue but resolved it by reverting changes to files that I had marked to 'ignore-on-commit'
Once I reverted these files, then tortoisesvn was able to commit all the other files from the merge
Is it fine if i proceed with this commit?
No, your commit will ignore all changes in WC-tree and reflect only root-level changes (broken merge).
You made an error when checking out non-recursive initially. You can try to perform good, full commit using --depth infinity parameter in the CLI or find this switch in TortoiseSVN GUI.
svn commit --depth infinity . -m "Merge"
Also for some files that I've SVN-added , I've made changes after adding (If this affects the nature).
In my case that was exactly what caused the message to appear, even I unselected those files for the commit.
Ugly solution which only works safely if just a few files are affected:
Create a copy of the changed files
Revert the changed files
Commit the merge/reintegration
Copy the changed files back to the original place
Reminder to self: only reintegrate a branch if the target (trunk) is clean.
I just had the same issue. Instead of selecting all the files, I clicked on versioned and everything worked well. In my case, the option versioned selected all the files, so everything is ok now.
It looks like TortoiseSVN performs some kind of validity checking before calling commit. Good but the error message is very unclear.
When I faced this issue, I went back to using the svn command line to commit. Commit failed due to the reason that one of the folders was not up to date. After updating just that folder, I ran "svn commit" once again and it went through.
Edit: PS: Before you use try this out, make sure you do not have any files marked as "ignore on commit". "Ignore on commit" is tortoise specific and SVN commit picks these changes as well.
Just thought I'd post this because it worked for me...
The reason this happened is because I'd partially renamed one of the new projects I'd created and for some reason they all showed up as "Missing" on the commit screen.
After I removed the project and folder (which SVN had put a tick on) and put it back in as a new project again, suddenly all of the "Missing" had turned into "Added" and the commit ran fine without warning me of anything.
Hope this helps!
I saw this issue and the cause was a few added files not having the added status for no apparent reason. They were 'normal' even though the parent folder correctly showed as 'added'. I reverted those 'normal' changes and then manually re-did them. This made each added item show up twice in the commit list but it resolved the error and everything appears to be in working order now.
It didn't have anything to do with ignore-on-commit as in another answer, it just seemed like a bug in TortoiseSVN.
The problem could be, that your mergeinfo is deleted by someone or automatically, because the infos moved up in the tree. If you are gonna merge them in again, it will work for the moment. But all others will get problems with their not merged branches. SVN will loose some code and merge already submitted code again.
So reverting those files and changing them again could work, but you should not just commit the changes.
i don't know a option for tortoisesvn but u could use the command line
svn commit --non-recursive [folder]
thats sould work just as u like it to work
greeings

SVN: How to get files added to svn and not committed

I have added a file (say SomeFile.cs) to a specific folder. I did not commit as I wanted to do commit at once after achieving the functionality. An svn update worked just fine on this until someone changed the folder name and changed the names of files under it.
Now the next day when I did svn checkout, resulted in tree level conflicts, so I copied my newly added files to this "new" location and did as "Resolve using theirs".
The resolve deleted all my local files and replaced with new folder and files. I could not find my local files (which were in my working copy) in my entire computer (includint recycle bin).
Now is there at least an option to retrieve the files which were added ("Add" option) to svn and NOT committed to svn using "Commit"?
Regards
AFAIK, only files committed to svn will be recoverable. But if you merge the conflict with theirs, then it would have overriden the changes locally.
Try to "Update to revision", but as your files were NOT committed it will most likely restore your directory structure in best case scenario.
Generally "Resolve using theirs" option is an equivalent of saying "I screwed up, they are right" -> whatever I have is wrong, and what they have is right -> overwrite my copy.
What you are asking for is pretty much against the workflow of SVN. Things don't get stored in the repository until they are committed, and are thus not "safe". You are supposed to commit often.
If you are trying to work but worried about other people's tree changes getting in your way, consider making a branch.
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.branchmerge.html
However, SVN should never overwrite files in your local working copy that have modifications. If you do an svn update, and someone has added/changed something, you will get a "conflict", which you will have to resolve manually. You resolved these conflicts manually, and accidentally overwrote you work. This is why you should commit often. Anything you commit can be recovered.

Is there a way prevent TortoiseSVN from "forgetting" the selected files when a commit fails?

My problem is this:
Basically if I try to commit a change to SVN and the commit fails then all the files I have selected are lost or forgotten and I have to go back through and choose the ones I want to commit again.
This is hugely annoying and I've not been able to find a solution to it.
So, is there any way that I can get TortoiseSVN to return to the state it was in just prior to when I pressed OK? i.e. all my selected files and comment are restored.
I know I can get the comment back using the Recent Messages button so it would be really handy if I could also do something similar to get the file list state back to what I had too.
For TortoiseSVN 1.6:
Settings-Dialog->Dialogs 2->Reopen commit and branch/tag dialog after a commit failed
in TSVN 1.7, that option is enabled by default, and only available as Settings->Advanced->OutOfDateRetry
If that is something that happens often to you, you could use change lists in TortoiseSVN. It works like that:
You check for modifications in your files by using the menu entry TortoiseSVN > Check for modifications.
In that dialog, you select the files you want to commit together, and select from the context menu Move to change list > <new changelist>.
You enter the name of the change list and accept it.
In you commit dialog, you see now the files grouped by change list, so if anything goes wrong, that information is kept then.
If you change the same files again and again, you may check the check box Keep changelists so that you may use the change list for your next commits.

How to temporarily apply (or archive) PATCH/DIFF changes from Tortoise SVN?

I've been using Tortoise SVN + Visual SVN for about a year since left the corporate world to do my own startup. There's one feature in Tortoise SVN that I've never figured out:
How can I bundle up a bunch of changes into a PATCH or DIFF file and either: A) share them with my co-founder; or B) archive them into a standalone change that I can either "apply" or "revert" on my dev box?
At my previous employer, we used an internal tool that let us build so-called DPK files that contained a set of local changes. You could add changed files to the DPK and then share it with colleagues. They could either review the changes in a Diff tool or apply all the changes from the DPK to test your change on their box. After the review was complete, you could then check in these changes. You could also have multiple DPK's applied at the same time (provided you didn't have overlapping changes).
I want to achieve the same thing with Tortoise SVN + Visual SVN in the VS2010 IDE.
My real-world scenario is that I have some extensive change pending but uncompleted on my box. I want to ZIP up these changes and store them in a DIFF file, revert the changes, move on to something else, work on that, and in a few days reapply my changes from the archived DIFF file.
Reluctantly answering my own question. This feature is available with Tortoise SVN. Basically, you make a PATCH file, distribute it or archive it, and then you apply the PATCH. The only trick is to make sure you're in the right location in the WC (Working Copy) when you do the "apply". When you apply, you'll get a popup menu to the left with a list of all files in the changelist. You can apply the patches one by one or in bulk. Seems to work great. I should have drilled into the docs more before posting this question.
Here's the text for picking the location:
"Patch files are applied to your
working copy. This should be done from
the same folder level as was used to
create the patch. If you are not sure
what this is, just look at the first
line of the patch file. For example,
if the first file being worked on was
doc/source/english/chapter1.xml and
the first line in the patch file is
Index: english/chapter1.xml then you
need to apply the patch to the
doc/source/ folder. However, provided
you are in the correct working copy,
if you pick the wrong folder level,
TortoiseSVN will notice and suggest
the correct level."
Be sure to pick the location carefully. If Tortoise SVN can't find it because you selected the wrong node in the VS file explorer, it will try to find a matching location and that might be wrong. In my tests, the Patch feature actually tried to map to a branch (!!) when I specified the wrong location.
Here's the relevant link:
http://tortoisesvn.net/docs/release/TortoiseSVN_en/tsvn-dug-patch.html

exclude a changelist from p4 sync

Is there any easy way to exclude a specific changelist from p4 sync?
I want to sync up my code, but I don't want to fetch the changes from changelist #1337
Like: p4 sync //depot/source/... - //depot/source/...#1337?
The best way to accomplish this is just sync to head, and then use the 'Back out submitted changelist' function in P4V ('Submitted' pane, right-click the undesired changelist, select 'Back out submitted changelist').
This will create a new pending changelist in your workspace with the undesired changes removed.
It is possible by syncing to a range and using two commands to "skip" the changelist.
p4 sync //depot/source/... - //depot/source/...#0,#1337
p4 sync //depot/source/... - //depot/source/...#1337,#head
Note: you may have to specify the changelist on either side of the one you want to skip - not sure if the range is inclusive.
HTH,
Dennis
Ok this should work depending on what you want to do. Man I really miss git :(
If you simply want to sync and temporarily ignore a changelist you can do what the first reply said and back out the change list. Just remember to not check that change list in unless you want to wipe out the ignored changelist for the branch. However this approach will not work if you need to make changes to files that exist in the ignored changelist.
If you need to work with the same files from the ignored changelist you can do the following. One thing to note however, is that the ignored changelist will be pulled out of the remote branch until you are ok with them being in your code. (there is one other option but requires someone else to do something)
If you want to ignore a change list, and not get rid of it completely but simply be able to work on your code with it off to the side, the following will work.
Back out the changelist as previously stated.
Submit the backed out changelist to wipe out the changes in the remote branch. (don't worry)
Now do another back out but this time back out the chagelist created by the previous back out and shelve it. This back out of the back out will be a pending change list that is basically a copy of the one you wanted to ignore. Once its shelved you can go about your work, even in the same files. The down side is that now the ignored changelist only exist on your work space and its up to you to submit it or decide what to do with it at some point.
You can keep the ignored change list shelved until you know what you want to do with it. If, after you work on your code, you want to re integrate that chagelist and merge it with yours you can simply unshelf it and resolve conflicts.
So the (other option)
You could do the above with help from another dev with a perforce account (perhaps the one who's changelist you want to ignore) in this case you could have them back out the changelist and submit, then you could sync, then they could back out their back out. In this case the remote branch would not need to stay in weird state while you worked on your code. The big downside is, that you would have to do this every time you wanted to sync.
A better option would be branching before an issue like this arrises but that is not as easy or light weight in perforce as it is in git.
Hope one of these options help or spark a finale and perfect solution from some one else.

Resources