Michael W Thelen <mike@pietdepsi.com> wrote on 08/16/2005 07:10:46 PM:
> Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> >> Are you against the feature altogether, or just the idea of a new
> >> subcommand? I believe all of the discussion on this feature has
> >> gravitated towards it being a new option on the checkout command
instead
> >> of a command in its own right.
> >
> > My feelings are
> >
> > 1. this is a good idea, a useful new feature. very much in demand.
> >
> > 2. it should be a switch, not a subcommand.
> >
> > 3. it should not reimplement rsync, it should just re-download the
> > *whole* file in those cases where the local checksum doesn't match the
> > server's checksum.
>
> The discussion of this feature has died down again, and it seems that
> the response has been generally positive. Should this be filed as an
> issue in the tracker, with a link to Jonathan Gilbert's original patch
> and a link to the "Addition of rsync algorithm" discussion as well?
We are getting this request a lot from Subclipse users. I would love to
see this make it into Subversion 1.3. At a minimum, we would like to see
the original proposed feature where a checkout could "slide a working
copy" underneath an existing project. Ideally, this would eventually be
enhanced to use the existing local files to construct the working copy
where possible. That would not be critical as an initial implementation
feature for us though.
Thanks
Mark
_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
_____________________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Aug 17 19:17:26 2005