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

Re: [PATCH] make svnmucc consistently overwrite copy targets

From: <kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 15:31:53 -0600

Philip Martin <philip_at_codematters.co.uk> wrote on 11/06/2008 01:31:52 PM:

> kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com writes:
> > Philip Martin <philip_at_codematters.co.uk> wrote on 11/06/2008 12:37:13
> >>
> >> I prefer the current error; I think it's better than replacing the
> >> history of something that exists.
> >
> > It is painful (for us) to not have an option to overwrite contents.
> > Silently overwriting is a little dangerous, but no history is
> > overwritten. You can always go back to the old revision number...
> To go back to the old revision you have to notice that the copy became
> a replace, and since it would happened silently it's easy to miss. I
> have no direct experince in this particular case, but in general I
> find it "painful" when things misbehave silently. I'm more inclined
> to add a check to prevent the directory/dav replace then to enable
> file replacement.

I put "painful" in quotes, because misbehavior is in the eye of
the beholder... I require overwrite capability...

svnmucc doesn't really document what should happen when the copy
target already exists. I agree it would be better to be more
consistent with the svn command line.

Options I see:
1) Add a --force (or maybe --overwrite) option
2) Add a new action such as CPO, or CPF, OV, OVER

Would patches for either of these be better received?
And if so, is #1 or #2 preferred?

Kevin R.
Received on 2008-11-06 22:32:09 CET

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.