On Jan 9, 2008 4:56 PM, Miller, Eric <Eric.Miller_at_amd.com> wrote:
> > > I provided such a nice little recipe - can no one run a quick check
> > > using a 1.5 client?
> > So, we're grateful for the recipe, but we don't need the attitude.
> I didn't mean it to came off that way, but be honest - it took you and
> David far longer to type up the replies than it would have to simply cut
> and paste the recipe and responded with a yay or nay.
> With respect to the "disappointed" comment - well... That's because it
> is unfortunate that more people don't seem to care about the robustness
> of the meta-data scheme. For me it causes *severe* headaches on a daily
Eric, my #1 goal for Subversion in 2008 is to rewrite the working copy
support to make the metadata far far far more robust.
Before I can do that, I need to get trunk (merge tracking) into a
finished enough shape that it makes sense to be making these sorts of
major new features.
In fact, most of the current developers are distracted by the
merge-tracking/1.5-release madness, which has a lot of work left to be
Trust me, nobody likes the current working copy/metadata code. It's
the next Big Thing to fix. But we've gotta get there first.
And yes, I did type in your script, and ran it enough to determine
that "svn up wc" fixed your problem in this case.
And yes, I do care about tools deleting subdirectories. The only post
on my blog that has any significant number of comments (and still gets
linked from random places all the time) is
which is about how to teach OmniGraffle to not clobber subdirectories.
And if you scroll down you'll even see the comment from the 3rd-party
tool author saying they added a feature to make avoiding this easier
David Glasser | email@example.com | http://www.davidglasser.net/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-01-09 23:09:19 CET