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

On Sun, 2003-06-08 at 21:30, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> In a fit of anticipatory consensus (or others might call it
> "chest-beating geekismo"), I've changed the command to 'svn undo' in
> revision 6173.

I dunno, that seems kind of generic. It seems like "svn undo" suggests
that you could undo lots of things, not just local edits.

> My sense is that we all pretty much agreed that "revert" and "resolve"
> sometimes get confused, with possibly disastrous results.

I don't really agree. I mean, I'm sure people have done it, but I'm not
certain that it happens often enough to justify picking less intuitive
command names.

I've also never liked the command "svn resolve", since it's kind of a
lie (the actual operation is something like "mark-resolved", but that's
unwieldly). So I'd be more tempted to search for alternatives for
"resolve" than for "revert."

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jun 9 06:05:06 2003