On Thursday 27 October 2005 05:29, John Szakmeister wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 October 2005 14:26, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> > Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org> writes:
> > > This adds an option "-c" (long form --change) that is shorthand for
> > > "<rev -1>:<rev>", to merge.
> >
> > Why not just do it with -r?
> >
> > More precisely: when a subcommand *requires* two revisions, but is
> > passed only one, why not just translate that to <rev - 1>:<rev> ?
> >
> > (Have we already discussed this? It feels vaguely familiar...)
>
> I think one downside is that we don't currently have a WORKING keyword.
> Overloading -r would break things like 'svn diff -rXX /path/to/file'. That
> command generates a diff between version XX and WORKING of the file. We
> would have to other way to generate such a diff without interfacing to the
> bindings or writing a tool to leverage the subversion libraries.
>
> I don't use such things often, and I doubt other do as well. But it does
> prevent a user from doing such things without a WORKING revision keyword.
/me will learn to read the entire thread before posting... this has already
been brought up elsewhere. Sorry for the noise.
-John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Oct 27 11:34:43 2005