Julian Foad <julianfoad@btopenworld.com> writes:
> In a simplified view of working, when you finish making a change, you
> either commit it or revert it.
>
> Whatever "svn commit" does with regard to locks, "svn revert" should
> do something similar. That is, if "svn commit" releases locks from
> the given targets, or has an option to do so or not to do so, "svn
> revert" should have the same default and options.
>
> Am I talking sense?
In a shallow and superficial way, yes.
/me ducks :-)
Seriously, when I revert a change, it doesn't necessarily mean I'm not
working on that problem anymore, it just means I'm undoing a false
start. I don't think it would be very intuitive for 'revert' to
unlock things the way 'commit' does -- they're not really symmetrical,
because they don't both mean "I'm done with this problem now.".
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Dec 17 20:41:04 2004