Re: Backing out changes: the prefered method?

"Sander Striker" <striker@apache.org> writes:

> > i believe the current plan is something like that, but there are also
> > people who disagree, and think that rollback should physically remove
> > changes from the repository itself. i'm not one of those people, but
> > they do exist.
> >
> > -garrett
>
> Actually, that would be quite nice. Saves you from having
> to muck with a working copy.
>
> svn rollback [(<url>|<path>)] [--recursive] <revision>

Sure, the command could build a transaction that has links to 'older'
nodes, and then do a commit. And no working copy need be in sight.

But I think garrett was talking about people who want to actually
remove all history of the change from the server. That's a much
bigger deal; our server is designed to -only- grow right now, it can
never lose information. The suggestion above simply creates a new
revision that looks like an older one, rather than truly deleting a
revision.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:37:01 2006