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

Re: 'svn revert' vs. 'svn resolve'

From: <kfogel_at_collab.net>
Date: 2003-06-06 21:29:01 CEST

Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman@collab.net> writes:
> * I would argue that 'svn revert conflicted-file' is
> actually performed more often on *purpose* than by
> accident. I use that technique all the time, when I want
> to toss my local mods without editing conflict markers.
> So does that mean folks will just get habituated into
> *always* typing --force? If so, it recreates the problem.

This objection doesn't hold -- habituation to the correct command
won't cause habituation to the incorrect command, if the two habits
(key sequences) are different.

Consider: if you accidentally type "revert" when you meant to type
"resolve", you won't also pass --force (because resolve doesn't
require that, and you thought you were resolving). Thus, when the
command fails because you didn't pass '--force', that's your signal
that you didn't type the command you meant to type. Disaster

It's true that when you *intend* to revert, you will probably
habituate to typing '--force'. But that's okay, because you want the
command to succeed then anyway!

Brought to you by the Committee To Make Habituation Not Automatically
Synonymous With Evil When Discussing User Interfaces,


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jun 6 22:14:06 2003

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.