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

Re: Tree conflict bug with switch

From: Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:16:42 -0400

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 15:21, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Euh... I thought we were supposed to disallow a switch if localmods existed.
>>> Did that requirement get relaxed? Why? It doesn't seem reasonable at all to
>>> allow localmods on one path to magically be applicable to another.
>> Forgetting tree conflict situations, isn't that a common way to
>> "shelve" changes?  Developer is in middle of work but has to task
>> switch.  Rather than make a patch, you can make a branch, switch to
>> it, and commit your changes.  Then switch back to trunk to be clean
>> again.
> Not that I was aware of. I figured you would do this:
> $ svn cp . $REPOS/branches/hold-my-stuff-kthxbai

That works, but it requires more SVN intelligence to merge the changes
back later.


I think a lot of people do this and we have never (at least since 1.0)
prevented people from using switch when their WC is modified.

Mark Phippard
Received on 2009-09-29 22:17:01 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.