> I'm not sure this is a big enough problem to warrant any special
> support. Honestly, in ~8 years of working with copy-modify-merge
> revision control systems (CVS and then Subversion), I think I've maybe
> lost a total of 30 minutes to this sort of semantic problem. Usually
> I knew in advance (from commit mails or other forms of developer
> communication) that the incoming change was dangerous, and adjusted my
> update accordingly.
>
> If your user has had a different experience, that's one thing. But if
> she's just *anticipating* a problem, then I want to say "Try it and
> you'll see."
I'm totally in agreement with you. I have no problem with the current
functionality. But I'm trying to rally support for subversion from the
development team. "Try it and you'll see" almost works, but better would be
"Oh, if you're worried, just do a 'svn up --paranoid' and it will make a
copy of each of your pre-merged files before doing its automatic merge." We
could change --paranoid to --unreasonably_paranoid just to make it clear...
;)
--- Eric
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Aug 18 17:39:12 2003