On 7/15/06, Max Bowsher <maxb1@ukf.net> wrote:
> Karl Fogel wrote:
> > "Garrett Rooney" <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> writes:
> >> On 7/14/06, Karl Fogel <kfogel@google.com> wrote:
> >>> So can we get 'exclude' functionality without adding an 'exclude'
> >>> command? Some ideas to exclude subdir FOO:
> >>>
> >>> svn update --depth -1 FOO /* ugly, though consistent in a way */
> >>> svn update --exclude FOO /* hmmm, I like this better */
> >> Oh good, another "svn switch is totally different from svn switch
> >> --relocate" situation...
> >
> > Sure, except that in this case the two functionalities are not so
> > superficially similar as to be likely to cause confusion. What goes
> > on in a switch of either kind could reasonably be called a
> > "relocation", whereas what goes on in a normal update cannot by any
> > stretch of the imagination be called an "exclusion". Clear words make
> > clear heads.
>
> Ouch!
>
> Making these things part of the 'svn update' command seems to imply to
> me that they are mixing up the concepts of adding and subtracting items
> to/from the WC, and changing the WCs revision.
>
> This seems very wrong to me.
Exactly. I think of update as 'pull in changes from server' not
'modify versioned targets/entries in this working copy'. I'd hate to
see get the two conflated.
So, I too (like Peter Samuelson) feel that 'svn update --exclude foo'
doesn't mean what you 'obviously thought it would mean': I think it
excludes the foo subtree from the update (as in: doesn't remove it,
but just doesn't update it).
bye,
Erik.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Jul 15 19:25:47 2006