Re: Minor feature request: --dry-run for update

> On Mar 19, 2009 5:55 PM, "Greg Stein" <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> "svn st --show-updates" is what you're asking for. I really don't
> understand why that doesn't work.

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, David Glasser wrote:
> svn st -u only tells what would happen if you ran exactly "svn up";
> without making the status CLI way uglier than the "svn up --dry-run"
> proposal, it's not going to tell you what would happen with a more
> complicated update command (with -r, --depth, etc).

When "svn status -u" shows that a file has local modifications and
also has new version in the repository, it doesn't indicate whether
the local and repository changes would conflict. "svn merge --dry-run
-rBASE:HEAD" is much closer to what "svn update --dry-run" should do.

--apb (Alan Barrett)
Received on 2009-03-30 19:15:17 CEST