On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:55:33AM -0400, Trent Fisher wrote:
> On 06/26/2012 05:02 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:13:50PM +0200, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> >>On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 8:07 PM,<kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com> wrote:
> >>>Any reason svnsync couldn't grow a "--fail-on-access-error" option?
> >>Sure, I think that could be useful (as long as it's not the default
> >>(backwards compat)).
> >Would printing a warning not be sufficient?
> That would be an improvement, but since it seems like sometimes this
> behavior may be desired or expected, it may be better to always
> print a warning, and bomb out given an extra option like that
> suggested by Kevin, above.
Yes, I agree that would make sense.
Received on 2012-06-27 20:53:06 CEST