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

Re: [PATCH]: Was [PROPOSAL] Takeover Take 2

From: Molle Bestefich <molle.bestefich_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2006-05-08 19:48:33 CEST

For this particular posting, sliding in text-base files and leaving
everything else untouched is called "generic takeover".

Paul Burba wrote:
> No disrespect intended to those who wanted another approach,
> but IMHO I had reasonable support for my proposal and that
> is what this patch is about.

Your proposal is about satisfying the miniscule use case that your
Eclipse-related needs comprise.
The generic takeover approach is functionality at a lower level and
therefore would leverage Subversion as a generic versioning backend
much more than what your approach does.

I also think it would be useful to more people.

I have absolutely nothing against your approach, but I do think that
it's a little sad that you didn't consider implementing the
aforementioned generic takeover functionality while you're knee deep
in code that's very related anyway.

> ***** USE CASE A: Dir obstructs a file *****
> ***** USE CASE B: File obstructs a dir *****
> ***** USE CASE C: Identical file obstructs a file *****
> ***** USE CASE D: Different file obstructs a file *****
> ***** USE CASE E: Versioned dir obstructs a dir *****
> ***** USE CASE F: Versioned dir of different URL obstructs a dir *****
> ***** USE CASE G: Out of date versioned dir obstructs a dir *****
> ***** USE CASE H: Dir obstructs a dir *****

I don't know what that is, but it's not use cases :-).
If it's "scenarios that SVN might encounter during forced checkout",
perhaps call it SCENARIO [A..H]..

Alan Barrett wrote:
> As I have asked before, please reserve the term "takeover" for the
> process (not yet implemented) of converting a non-working-copy
> directory to a working copy directory without making any other changes.

+1

Calling it "takeover" insinuates that this feature
will do something that it actually won't.

Call it "forced checkout" or something?

> The term "takeover" was not used to my knowledge in anything
> visible to a user. Paul was just saying that he was using
> that term in describing his patch, and perhaps within the
> patch comments.

It would probably be helpful if you stopped using it as a synonym
for "forced checkout" there too =)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon May 8 19:49:04 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.