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

Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:

> On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 13:46, Brian Denny wrote:
> > This is ok with me, but i wonder why there has been no discussion of
> > sussman's suggestion to leave the command names as they are, and just
> > leave behind a .mine file when reverting a conflict?
>
> I don't see why conflicts should get special status for revert [...]

Because if somebody runs "svn revert conflicted-file", there's a
non-negligible possibility that they really meant to run "svn resolve"
instead. Thus: conflicted files get treated specially by 'revert'.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Jun 10 00:33:05 2003