Re: What do you Hate about Subversion?

On Jan 28, 2007, at 14:58, Eric wrote:

> At 06:43 AM 1/28/2007, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>
>> I'd disagree with that. One of the strong points of Subversion is
>> that it does atomic operations. One of the things I dislike about
>> Subversion is that only some of the operations are atomic. For
>> example, it's easy to get in a mess when you do an update and it
>> fails half-way through, leaving you with a mixed revision working
>> copy.
>
> Now, THIS I don't understand. Operations are either atomic, or
> they are not. Everything I've read about Subversions makes a VERY
> big deal out of the fact that operations are atomic. Now, are you
> saying that they are only atomic "sometimes"?

Some operations, like commits, are atomic. If any part of the commit
fails, the entire commit fails. This is good.

Other operations, like updates, are not atomic. If the update fails
part of the way through -- for example because of temporary network
problems -- part of the working copy is updated, and part of it is
not. This is not ideal, but in many circumstances is not a big deal:
just run the update again.

-- 
To reply to the mailing list, please use your mailer's Reply To All  
function
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org