[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: lost revision?

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_newton.ch.collab.net>
Date: 2002-11-01 17:03:29 CET

Brian Denny <brian@briandenny.net> writes:
> > I think that might be a better behavior than implicit `.', yes.
>
> why? are there other svn commands which default to the repository if
> no arguments are given?

Because we keep hearing that it confuses people (probably because they
expect log to be about the repository, by default, not about a local
path that was never explicitly mentioned). And to tell the truth,
it's bitten me a couple of times, even.

There aren't many other commands for which "defaulting to the
repository" would make sense, so searching for surface consistency
here doesn't help, I think.

> implicit '.' makes sense to me, by analogy with 'svn up'.

Sure, but update needs to choose a local path to work at all. Log
does not. They're about different things.

I take it that the default log behavior has never confused you, then?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Nov 1 17:36:00 2002

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.