[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 20:04:27 CEST

Julian Foad <julianfoad@btopenworld.com> writes:

> kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> > "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato@collab.net> writes:
> >
> >>>-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.
> > I really like the empty string solution ("-r:N") Greg proposed. It's
> > essentially just as easy to type, but doesn't overload the current
> > meaning of -rX, and thus could DTRT for diff as well as merge.
> > Could we just support that, and leave -rX alone?
> Karl, really! Far too ambiguous. No. Somebody earlier this year
> tried hard to persuade me to accept a patch making ":N" mean "0:N" and
> "N:" mean "N:HEAD". You see what I mean?

Oh, yeah. Good point. Being a Pythonic kind of guy, if I saw syntax
like :N or N:, I would assume the same (0:N, N:HEAD).

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 4 20:07:20 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.