Re: Merging confuses renamed files

Jack Repenning <jrepenning@collab.net> writes:

> At 2:53 PM -0500 8/22/03, John Goerzen wrote:
>>
>>I don't quite follow your question, but I can state that from the
>>example, "." is *NOT* a working copy of http://foo.com/somewhere. It
>>could be a working copy at file:///home/alice/alicerepos.

Sorry, s/at/of/

> Wait, I'm all confused.
>
> So when you say "a working copy at file:///home/alice/alicerepos", I
> think you really mean "a repository there." Yes?

No, I mean a working copy *OF*. That is, the checked-out version.

> You're saying "it could do this." I agree with that.

I'm also saying "I *think* it could do this fairly trivially."

> I'm saying "it doesn't do this." I think you agree with that
> ... that's what got you started!

Indeed.

> If the question is "why doesn't it do this?" then the answer is
> "because it was not a design goal." Put another way, SVN is trying to
> replace CVS, not Bitkeeper.

I think that's a cop-out. To me, if merging destroys custom changes
that should not be, with no warning, that is a bug.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Aug 22 22:11:58 2003