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

Re: Split the functions of `cvs update'?

From: Bruce Korb <bkorb_at_sco.COM>
Date: 2000-10-31 18:00:27 CET

Lee Burgess wrote:
> However, I also agree that it would be nice if cvs (svn) status had a
> more terse form. I have found that the normal output of cvs status is
> very useful. Yet, from the general concensus, it is just as useful to
> have output that gives much simpler information that is still in the
> realm of file "status".
>
> Rather than having a new command "svn changes", why not just have some
> local options to "svn status": like a long form and a short form?

Because `svn status' seems like a very convenient vehicle for
supplying arbitrary information that a script may wish to extract.
What if `svn status' had a standard, default display that was
configured with a format string. That format string could be
over-ridden with an option (``--format=....'') and we made an
option alias or two for formats that were likely to be commonly
used? Here is an approximation that would likely be abbreviated:

   --format="%{obj-name}: %{ver=TAG} vs. %{local-ver} is %{mod-state}\n"

So, if TAG were associated with the 1234 version of object mumble,
but the local copy were version 1222 but unchanged, you get:

  mumble: 1234 vs. 1222 is unchanged
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:13 2006

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