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

Re: Add -c option to merge

From: Daniel Rall <dlr_at_finemaltcoding.com>
Date: 2005-10-26 23:37:04 CEST

On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, Julian Foad wrote:

> Daniel Rall wrote:
> >On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> >>On Tue, 2005-10-25 at 17:08 -0400, Greg Hudson wrote:
> >>
> >>>-c {DATE} would mean the same thing as -r X-1:X where X is what {DATE}
> >>>resolves to.
> >>>
> >>>Admittedly, "show me or merge in the change I made most recently as of
> >>>foo time" is probably an edge case, but it does have a straightforward
> >>>meaning in my mind.
> >>
> >>I can accept the full revision format if that's what we want. It just
> >>seemed weird to talk about "change 2005-06-19", when 2005-06-19 is not a
> >>revision number.
> >
> >Yet, 2005-06-19 does map to a specific revision, and grabbing the delta
> >between that revision and the previous revision would certainly parallel
> >the
> >behavior of passing revnums to -c. Even with the obvious parallel, is
> >anyone likely to actually use the date variation of this feature?
> >Perhaps...
> "-c {DATE}" can certainly have a well defined meaning as stated above.
> However, that does not mean it is inherently a useful concept. I don't
> think we have yet demonstrated a good reason to accept it. Let us reserve
> the possibility of supporting it in the future if and when such a need is
> demonstrated. Likewise the other forms in which a revision can be
> specified: "-c BASE", "-c HEAD", etc.

Practically speaking, I do tend to think that the pure revnum form is the
most useful.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Oct 26 23:44:00 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.