Login | Register
My pages Projects Community openCollabNet

Discussions > users > TortoiseSVN approches to resolve Tree Conflicts

Project highlights: :. Download .: :. Support .: :. FAQ .: :. Translations .: :. Donate .: :. Report Bug .:

Discussion topic

2020-03-13: This site is going to be decommissioned and shut down very soon. Please copy and archive any data you wish to keep ASAP

Back to topic list

TortoiseSVN approches to resolve Tree Conflicts

Author Sergey <spiderkot at gmail dot com>
Full name Sergey <spiderkot at gmail dot com>
Date 2010-11-08 02:12:24 PST
Message Hi,

TortoiseSVN can help with several kinds of tree conflicts using *Edit
Conflict* window.

The problem is that in case of "*... upon merge*" conflict types TortoiseSVN
can't guess which files need to be merged.

For example, (case: *local missing, incoming delete upon update*)

· Developer A working on trunk modifies file Foo.c and commits it to
the repository.

· I working on branch move file Foo.c to Bar.c and commit it to the

A merge of developer A's changes to my branch working copy results in a tree

· Bar.c is already in my working copy with status 'normal'

· Foo.c is marked as missing with a tree conflict

In most cases I need to merge Developer A’s changes to Foo.c into the
renamed Bar.c.

But how can I do it?

File Foo.c with Developer A’s changes does not present in my branch WC.

The *TortoiseSVN Help* says “*Note that if you copy the missing file from
the repository and then mark as resolved, your copy will be removed again.
You have to resolve the conflict first.*”

So, should I need to chechout *trunk* to have access to Foo.c file for

Is there more simple approach to solve this problem?

Thank you,


« Previous message in topic | 1 of 1 | Next message in topic »


Show all messages in topic

TortoiseSVN approches to resolve Tree Conflicts Sergey <spiderkot at gmail dot com> Sergey <spiderkot at gmail dot com> 2010-11-08 02:12:24 PST
Messages per page: