Karl Fogel <kfogel@newton.ch.collab.net> writes:
> I like it! All your reasons make sense to me.
>
> I've never been confused by the current import syntax, but I note that
> I have to look it up every time. And I came up with it, so that says
> something :-(.
+1 on Peter's suggestion.
However, I always assumed that the 'svn import' syntax was so odd
because the client has no wc, so can't tell where the repos begins in
the URL. Is there a valid technical reason for the current syntax or
is it just hysterical raisins?
-Fitz
> > And, the change would provide one additional use case:
> >
> > (4) $ svn import url://repos/new-entry
> > Create directory new-entry/ in repository and copy contents of current
> > directory there. You end up with "url://repos/new-entry/working-copy/foo".
> >
> > which is impossible right now because you can't specify the third argument
> > without the second.
>
> Is this really true? Can't you just use `.' as the second argument?
>
> > Much like removing the "-d" option from checkout, this change would probabl
> y
> > confuse existing users. But in the end, it would make a lot more sense, an
> d
> > it is better to change it now before 1.0 makes a change impossible.
>
> Sure, agreed.
>
> > Are there technical reasons why the change would be impossible? Is there a
>
> > reason why it wasn't made like this in the first place? CVS's import is so
>
> > convoluted, I hope it burns in hell :), so I don't think CVS should be a
> > factor in any decision.
>
> I can't even remember the reasons for the current syntax now.
>
> -K
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
-Fitz
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Oct 14 21:55:48 2002