Re: Diff --old --new: too many peg revision specifiers

On 3/13/06, Julian Foad <julianfoad@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> We've got a nasty relic of a meaning of "-r" in "diff --old --new" syntax.

I think independently I ran into what you mean. The -r syntax doesn't
do anything close to what it should do.

> The peg-rev notation was added in r9707, round about v1.1, changing the help to:
>
> 2. diff [-r N[:M]] --old=OLD-TGT[@OLDREV] [--new=NEW-TGT[@NEWREV]] \
> [PATH...]
>
> That is when "-r" was made to provide "defaults" for the peg revs, in order to
> maintain compatibility with the v1.0 UI syntax.

Per my other email, that's not true. Setting '-r' doesn't do anything
for peg revs. (Perhaps it should?)

> * error or warn if both "-r" and an "@" are specified, because that was
> never intended

That's currently mandatory if a path has been deleted.

> * deprecate "-r" by changing the help to say so
>
> but those would both be incompatible UI changes. Would either of them be
> desirable on balance?

I think -r is the logical usage - not URL@REV. It fits with up, log,
blame, etc.

> In short, I'm trying to find a migration path from having this horrible meaning
> of "-r" to eventually either not having "-r" or having it specify operative
> revisions as it does in other commands and particularly in other forms of "svn
> diff".
>
> Does anyone see any better steps along that road?

I'd go back to our 1.0 UI and drop peg revs entirely. *duck* -- justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Mar 14 03:48:16 2006