[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: 'svn merge -rX' UI annoyance.

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: 2005-08-04 19:35:38 CEST

Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:

> On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 18:22 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> > Though it would be more difficult to implement, I think the proposal to accept
> > a revision keyword which means "the other revision minus one" is a better
> > strategy because it can be unambiguous, uniform across different commands, and
> > extensible in a backward-compatible way.
> Yeah, I'm coming to a similar conclusion. Some way of writing -r N-1:N
> which applies to all commands seems more appropriate than special-casing
> "svn merge -rN" simply because that currently has no meaning.
> (I'm a little surprised that "svn merge -rN URL" doesn't do the same
> thing as "svn diff -rN URL", which is N:HEAD. That's probably not a
> terribly common desire, but it would be consistent.)
> -r PRIOR:N would work, or we could opt for something more magic, like
> -r :N or -c N or some such. Nothing really jumps out at me as superior.

Check my patch -- it adds underlying support for exactly such a
keyword. All that it lacks is the parsing of some text (like "PRIOR")
into the new svn_opt_revision_range_prev "kind" I created.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 4 19:38:43 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.