Re: Issue #1075 analysis

[replying to self, again] :)

On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 10:01:18AM -0700, Brian Denny wrote:
> [sussman:]
> > Perhaps schedule-delete directories shouldn't be described as missing
> > at all -- only "deleted" ones. That would make the server send a
>
> i'm confused again. what do you mean by "schedule-delete" and
> "deleted", respectively?

now i get it. :) "schedule-delete" means you did 'svn rm DIR' on it;
'deleted' means you did 'svn up -rNUM DIR', where DIR is gone in rev
NUM, so that the dir is gone, but since you haven't updated the parent
dir yet, it still has an entry for DIR, marked as 'deleted'.

y'know, i think schedule-delete directories *already* aren't described
as missing. hmm.

-brian,
who seems to be good at answering his own questions today,
several hours after posting them to the list...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Apr 22 04:40:03 2003