Behaviour of "update" vs. "merge" w.r.t. tree changes (and tree conflicts)
From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:05:03 +0100
Enlightenment sought from anybody who can help, on three questions:
* Update is smarter than Merge w.r.t. tree changes
"svn update" can detect whether the object in your WC that it's about to modify
"svn merge" cannot do this, because it just applies a change to the target
This is by design. I just want to check that I understand correctly and that
* Update: permits adding a file already scheduled for add
/* When adding, there should be nothing with this name unless unversioned
Why do we allow "update" to add a file that is locally scheduled for
* Update: silently undeletes a deleted file
/* sussman sez: If we're trying to add a file that's already in
This sounds like something we do only because CVS users got used to doing it.
I would like to convert this case to a tree conflict. Is there any serious
- Julian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
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.