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

Re: Extending new update --force switch to handle local additions -- also new related FAQ

From: Mark Phippard <markp_at_softlanding.com>
Date: 2006-08-24 16:07:07 CEST

Julian Foad <julianfoad@btopenworld.com> wrote on 08/23/2006 07:04:02 PM:

> Mark Phippard wrote:
> > The scenario is that the user contributed a patch to an open source
> > project using Subversion. The patch included new files, so he ran svn
add
> > so that they would be included in the svn diff output. The patch is
> > accepted and committed by a committer. The user now runs svn update
on
> > his working copy and it fails because he still has the new files in
his
> > working copy. He feels that update should handle this.
>
> Yes, and more. Since we automatically resolve text modifications when
the
> local change is identical to the repository change, I say we ought to
> automatically resolve identical tree operations - add/delete/move
file/dir.
>
> > Paul Burba's recent patch added --force option to update. If the file
was
> > in an unversioned status in his working copy, and he used this option,

> > then update would handle the situation. I think we should consider
> > extending this feature to do the same thing if the file was a
scheduled
> > add in his working copy.
>
> It shouldn't need "force". It should just be part of our normal
behaviour that
> we merge identical changes in the obvious trivial way. Is there any
possible
> difficulty with this? (There is the chance that this is not the
semantically
> correct merge in some cases, but that applies equally to text changes
and to
> tree changes.)
>
> > Would it be OK if I enter an issue for this in the issue tracker?
>
> Certainly - please do.

I entered one last week:

http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2593

> (I have not looked at your FAQ. (It didn't show up as text in my mail
client.)
> I'm sure if it says anything useful at all then it is better to have
it than
> not to have it.)

Here is the FAQ I committed:

http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html#obstructed-add

I'll have Paul Burba take a look at this when he has some time.

Mark

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 24 16:13:49 2006

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.