[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
prevented.

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,

-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.