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

Re: svn commit: r1089856 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/switch_tests.py

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 11:01:45 -0400

On 04/11/2011 05:53 AM, Philip Martin wrote:
> "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato_at_collab.net> writes:
>
>> But we obviously have precedent for supporting committed copies
>> of deeply switched things, so perhaps this isn't the best use of our time
>> right now.
>
> "Support" is generous, we only really support copied switches with no
> modifications:
>
> svnadmin create repo
> svn import -mm repo/format file://`pwd`/repo/A/B/f
> svn import -mm repo/format file://`pwd`/repo/A/B/C/g
> svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc
> svn sw ^/A/B/C wc/A/B
> svn cp wc/A wc/X
>
> Using 1.6 the copy of the switch does not show up in status. Using 1.6
> the switch does not count as a local modification and gets ignored by
> the the commit harvester. After the commit 1.6 shows wc/X/B as
> switched.
>
> If I make a text modification within the switched subdir before commit:
>
> echo xx >> wc/X/B/g
>
> then the commit fails because it attempts to modify /X/B/g in the
> repoository and that file does not exist. The fact that 1.6 attempts to
> commit modifications to the wrong file is a definite bug, if the path
> existed and the checksums matched the commit would go through.
>
> 1.7 treats the copy of the switch as a local modification that gets
> committed as a replace; after the commit there is no switch. The test
> is new in 1.7 and it's not clear to me that the new behaviour is
> correct.

Man, my gut says to just not allow folks to copy trees with switched
children until we have a more-fully-formed vision regarding how to deal with
the overlap of the copy and switch concepts. (Of course, that sanity check
would need to *not* block copies of trees with file externals ... our
now-routine "when is switched not *really* switched" exception.) Yes, I
realize that this might be considered the cop-out position to take. I'm
okay with that.

Philip, you say that it's not clear to you that the new behavior is correct.
 What are you currently leaning towards?

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand

Received on 2011-04-11 17:02:17 CEST

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.