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

Re: 'svn merge -rX' UI annoyance.

From: Christopher Ness <chris_at_nesser.org>
Date: 2005-08-05 17:57:59 CEST

On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 12:59 -0500, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> Julian Foad <julianfoad@btopenworld.com> writes:
> > When I said "ambiguous" I didn't mean syntactically ambiguous for
> > parsing, but too confusing for the user to learn in the context of
> > what we already have, which includes "-rX" means "-rX:WC" for "svn
> > diff WC" or "-rX:HEAD" for "svn diff URL".
>
> Perhaps a new special word (such as PRIOR) would be better than.

The keywords currently in use for {log,merge,diff} are:
                                NUMBER revision number
                                "{" DATE "}" revision at start of the date
                                "HEAD" latest in repository
                                "BASE" base rev of item's working copy
                                "COMMITTED" last commit at or before BASE
                                "PREV" revision just before COMMITTED

But these are statically based on the repository or working copy.

Perhaps some RELATIVE keywords are needed based on the other argument in
a revision range, like -rX:Y

For example prefix the relative keyworkds with 'R' only operate for a
range such as

RPREV = N-1 s.t. N > 0
RCOMMITTED = last commit at or before other range number
RNEXT = N+1 s.t. N < HEAD

    -r100:RPREV = 100:99 or switching it
    -rRPREV:100 = 99:100
    -rRPREV = UNDEFINED or perhaps PREV

The BASE and HEAD keywords don't make much sense in a relative term.
I'd also suggest a new keyword one RNEXT.

NEW THOUGHT:

When I was reading this thread I thought it would be nice if svn allowed
a mathematical revision number.

The user could enter `-r100+1:100` and the left revision would be
evaluated to 101. Or -r100:2*100-1 where the right right revision
evaluates to (2*100)-1 = 199
Bracketing would need to be required for proper syntax of order of
operations making the implementation more difficult.

Thoughts? I'm off to vacation for two weeks so I won't be around, but
hopefully someone will take the ball and run with it.

Cheers,
Chris

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Aug 5 17:59:48 2005

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.