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

Re: CVS update: subversion/subversion/libsvn_wc status.c Makefile.am wc.h

From: Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman_at_newton.collab.net>
Date: 2000-10-25 15:44:02 CEST

Branko =?iso-8859-2?Q?=C8ibej?= <brane@xbc.nu> writes:

> I thought it should be possible for status to report that a file
> is currently in conflict? After an update, of course. Oh, that would
> be nice! Let's not have any ">>>>>>"'s in working copy files, let's
> not have to update to see conflicts ...

Sounds like some bells and whistles -- a good idea, but of course this
goes beyond what CVS does, which is all we're trying to do at this

Right now, the `status' command just grabs a version number from the
repository. Perhaps we can eventually pass an extra flag which makes
it fetch the *entire* repos file and attempt to merge it in a scratch

Of course, this starts to blur the line between `status' and
`update'. Suppose the status command tells you that your locally
modified file is currently in conflict. What then? What are you
going to do about it? Do you expect to see the conflict in a scratch
area? Are you going to update that one file to see the conflict? I'm
not sure I understand what itch is being scratched.
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:12 2006

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