On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 10:57:58PM -0400, Greg Hudson wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-05-06 at 22:48, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> > > 2. Phillip Martin's suggestion, where "svn diff" takes either one or
> > > two arguments (instead of N arguments or two arguments).
> > personally, (2) seems the most intuitive to me, but i haven't done a
> > ton of work with cvs. what makes this syntax inconsistent with cvs?
> In CVS, I can make a bunch of mods in a directory, do "cvs diff path1
> path2", and see the mods I made to path1 and path2 in particular. I do
> this all the time. I could "echo path1 path2 | xargs -n1 svn diff", of
> course; it's just harder.
> It's not just inconsistent but potentially surprising. Under Phillip's
> suggestion, "svn diff path1 path2" would diff path2 against path1,
> producing a successful result which is totally different from what a CVS
> user would expect.
> > and even if it is, would this be nice enough to break that
> > compatability? personally, i'd lean towards yes, since being able to
> > say 'svn diff http://svn.collab.net/branches/my_cool_branch' and
> > having it diff my_cool_branch with my working copy would be really
> > nice...
> "svn diff http:whatever .", you mean. Under option 2, "svn diff" with
> one argument would continue to behave as it does now.
ahh, ok, i see the problem. i'm not sure how to solve it mind you,
but i see the problem ;-)
perhaps making some distinction between the one path form when the
path is a url and when it isn't? if it is a url, and the -r foo:bar
hasn't been given, then compare that url at the current rev against
the current directory. if the -r has been given, then it works as it
does now, whether it's a url or a path.
just thinking out loud here...
garrett rooney Remember, any design flaw you're
firstname.lastname@example.org sufficiently snide about becomes
http://electricjellyfish.net/ a feature. -- Dan Sugalski
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Tue May 7 05:09:14 2002