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

Re: alias 'svn up -n' to 'svn st -u' when '--nonrecursive' removed? :-)

From: Greg Stein <gstein_at_lyra.org>
Date: 2002-07-13 01:58:13 CEST

On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 09:20:29PM +0100, Philip Martin wrote:
> Karl Fogel <kfogel@newton.ch.collab.net> writes:
> > Philip Martin <philip@codematters.co.uk> writes:
> > > patch --dry-run
> > > dpkg --no-act
> > > apt --no-act
> > > make -n
> >
> > Frankly I like the idea of making this a long option only. It's not
> > that common (or am I wrongly assuming my own experience is similar to
> > others'?)

I use 'cvs up -n' every now and then, but that doesn't apply to SVN because
of the status command. I do tend to use 'make -n install' frequently.

Point is: for a version control system, a "dry run" is going to be very
infrequent. Consider the use case: "what is this *going* to do?" We never
destroy local mods, and we always have "backups" in the sense that the
repository has all the data. There are simply very few cases where you want
to have SVN show you what it will do without actually doing it.

> > But if -n really is a widely used convention, then we can use -N for
> > --non-recursive and -n for this.
> --dry-run is my favorite :)

+0 on keeping -n for non-recursive (the failure mode is actually quite nice
    since it means it just doesn't touch as many files; altho I guess it
    could be bad for 'svn commit -n')

+1 on adding --dry-run (no short option)

Note that -n meaning --dry-run isn't all *that* common in my experience.


Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Jul 13 01:56:54 2002

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.