> We've had this discussion many times. Read the commentary at the very
> bottom of libsvn_wc/copy.c.
Sorry, I looked in the issue database and couldn't find that. Next time
I have to remind myself to search the sourcefiles as well.
But now after I read that comment in sibsvn_wc/copy.c I'd like to say
that I'm not happy with that explanation.
I wasn't talking about svn cp but about svn mv. Ok, I can see that a mv
is just a cp followed by a rm - but maybe that's what should change.
My suggestion is that 'svn mv foo foo2; svn mv foo2 foo3' is the same as
'svn mv foo foo3' i.e. the move to foo2 would just be overwritten.
If a commit between those moves occurs then it surely would get noted in
the repository, but if no commit occurs then why should the repo know
that?
If I add a line in a sourcefile, save it, open it again and change/add
another line
without commiting first then its like I added both lines with one save. The
repo
wouldn't know those changes in between and it hasn't to know them. It only
knows what gets committed. So: I think it should work the same way with
moves: only the last of the moves would get committed.
I don't want to cause troubles here, I just would need such a feature for
my shell integration.
Steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Nov 26 20:09:14 2002