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

Re: svn status proposal

From: Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman_at_collab.net>
Date: 2001-09-24 21:56:33 CEST

RADICS Peter <mitch@lbcons.net> writes:
> hm.. don't we get notified of files present in the repo, but not in our
> working copy? (Added) I think that would be necessary if we want to use
> svn st -u to find out what would happen with an update.

Aha! Yet another dimension to argue about!

Really, this debate centers on whether you think 'svn status' should
truly show you *everything* that would happen with an update, or
whether -what you have- is out of date.

Karl was saying earlier: the use case is finding out which of your
-existing- files is going to be patched; people want to know where to
expect merges or conflicts. Thus, you only want to know about things
you have -- not (A)dded items on the server.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:42 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.