Mark Phippard wrote:
> On 8/7/07, C. Michael Pilato <email@example.com> wrote:
>>>>> I wonder a bit whether we ought to even support this combination. In
>>>>> 1.4, did we support a --non-recursive option with --relocate? It
>>>>> seems like an odd use-case.
>>>> It's a ridiculous use-case which points (once again) to the silliness of
>>>> piggybacking our relocation logic onto the 'svn switch' subcommand. But
>>>> what's done is done, right?
>>> We can't just disallow certain option combinations?
>> Sure we can. The command-line client blocks --no-auto-props + --auto-props
>> with an error about them being mutually exclusive.
> OK let me be more specific, because I am confused by your "What's done
> is done" comment.
My "what's done is done" comment refers to the fact that we have 'svn switch
--relocate' at all, instead of just 'svn relocate'. That's all.
> Can we change trunk so that svn switch does not
> allow you to use --relocate and --depth together? Assuming we can,
> isn't that what we should do here?
Yes. And yes.
C. Michael Pilato <firstname.lastname@example.org>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Received on Tue Aug 7 16:33:01 2007