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

Re: M-x big-picture

From: Jim Blandy <jimb_at_zwingli.cygnus.com>
Date: 2001-02-01 22:18:55 CET

Branko =?ISO-8859-2?Q?=C8ibej?= <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
> > It remains the case that two different files (foo/xxx and
> > bar/xxx, if foo was copied to bar) might live in the same node. The
> > information about what happened should still be there if you look hard
> > enough.
> But this doesn't make sense to me at all. If I want a new branch, I'll
> use "svn branch". Copy should never create new branches, it's just
> semantically wrong. Either that, or I'm completely lost.

You're completely lost. :)

Subversion doesn't branch. Instead, you make a copy of your entire
source tree, and work there.
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:21 2006

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.