Re: update vs status, where should local mods be displayed?

On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 01:25:06PM -0700, Mo DeJong wrote:
> % svn status
> N ./ac-helpers/install.sh
> M ./autogen.sh
> M ./build.conf
> A ./buildcheck.sh

Hoorah - this is pretty close to how my opinion of how "svn status"
should work. SVN currently has unreadable status output as well as CVS!
(until you read the docs and find -M)

Note that by eradicating that annoying and useless "remote repos
revision" field, you also eradicate the need to go to the server, so
this is an entirely local thing. Which is IMO how it should be. And you
can get rid of lots of the annoying whitespace too.

I don't understand why people want to overload the "status" command with
doing updatey things. "status" should show me the status of the WC - end
of story. If you want some kind of "will an update change my WC"
command, add a --dry-run to "update", like make has, or something.

joe

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:41 2006