Hi Ben!
Thanks for your info.
My impression is that the problem you describe
is an implementation problem, but no logical problem
from user's perspective.
Some detail comments below:
> Q: Why can't we 'svn cp' something that we just copied?
> i.e. 'svn cp foo foo2; svn cp foo2 foo3"
>
> A: It leads to inconsistencies.
>
> In the example above, foo2 has no associated repository URL,
> because it hasn't been committed yet. But suppose foo3 simply
> inherited foo's URL (i.e. foo3 'pointed' to foo as a copy
> ancestor by virtue of transitivity.)
>
> For one, this is not what the user would expect. That's
Why not? If you modify the wc of a versioned file two times,
and then type svn diff, you also will get both modifications.
> certainly not what the user typed! Second, suppose that the
> user did a commit between the two 'svn cp' commands. Now foo3
> really *would* point to foo2, but without that commit, it
> pointed to foo. Ugly inconsistency, and the user has no idea
> that foo3's ancestor would be different in each case.
Why not? If you modify A - commit - modify B - commit a file,
you also get a different ancestor than modify A - modify B - commit.
This seems to be natural to me.
Cheers,
Folker
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Dec 26 17:16:15 2003