Re: RFC: svn update --print-log-messages

B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:

>ketil@ii.uib.no (Ketil Z. Malde) writes:
>
>
>>mark benedetto king <bking@answerfriend.com> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>>$ svn up
>>>U notes/autoversioning-strategy.txt
>>>Updated to revision 1234.
>>>
>>>
>>>When I see that, I think to myself "hey, I wonder what spiffy updates
>>>happened there?"
>>>
>>>
>>Okay, as people have pointed out, you can do 'svn -rBASE:HEAD log'
>>before you update, if you remember.
>>
>>It should (I suppose) also be easy for 'svn up' to print out the base
>>revision:
>>
>> $ svn up
>> U notes/autoversioning-strategy.txt
>> Updated from revision 1066 to revision 1234.
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>>
>
>Hmmm. I like the idea, but what should Subversion do in the case of a
>mixed revision working copy? For example, if I update just one file
>somewhere, or commit a file or two, then I have a mixed revision
>working copy (you can see this yourself by checking out a working
>copy, change a file, commit it, then run svn status -v).
>
>So the long and the short is that I don't think there's a way to
>really accomplish what you suggest, but I'd love to be proven
>wrong. :)
>
>

Oh, I suppose one way would be to print the current WC revision in the
trace, changing

    U notes/autoversioning-strategy.txt

to

    U (1066) notes/autoversioning-strategy.txt

or some such. No, I have no opinion about how useful that would actually
be. But I'm sure it can be done at the price of complicating the code
even more.

-- 
Brane Čibej   <brane_at_xbc.nu>   http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org