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

Re: tree conflicts with replace

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:52:29 -0400

Bill Tutt wrote:
> I've always thought that a pending "replace" when reverted should
> decompose into the underlying operations and only revert the non-delete
> operation.
> That way the svn status command in your above example would output:
> [[[
> svn st
> D alpha
> ]]]
> The idea behind this behavior is the svn command line shouldn't mind
> read the user's intention behind issuing the revert command.
> svn doesn't know if the user wants to revert the delete as well as the add.

'svn revert' has a very clear meaning today, though, which would be muddled
by the behavior you suggest: "restore TARGET to an unmodified state". It's
for this reason that we didn't name the command 'svn undo', which would
imply a stack of reversible operations.

C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand

Received on 2009-08-13 17:52:55 CEST

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.