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

Re: suspected bug report or feature request - tagging a sparse directory

From: Stas Cherkassky <scherkas_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:46:32 +0200

- Great! Make it 'svn cp --sparse --force WC URL' - and we are all set !

[ --force means that we can override file that already exists in the URL,
e.g. by creating a new revision of it, and not issue error message like it
does now ]

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Philip Martin
<philip.martin_at_wandisco.com>wrote:

> "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato_at_collab.net> writes:
>
> > Stas, you are quite right that the messaging here is important, if only
> to
> > avoid hurt feelings. Your use-case is a valid one, and we'd all do well
> not
> > to discount it. But Subversion simply wasn't designed to accommodate it.
> > And this isn't even a small "oops we overlooked it" thing. This is a
> > fundamental difference between the tagging and branching paradigms in CVS
> > and Subversion -- a difference introduced intentionally when Subversion
> was
> > conceived.
>
> I think Stas has a point here. Subversion already does something
> similar for mixed revision working copies and switched working copies.
> If one copies such a working copy to the repository the revision will
> include appropriate deletes and replaces to "match" the working copy.
> Now if one checks out such an URL it produces a simple, single
> revision working copy, not the original mixed or switched one, but
> from a content point of view it looks like the original. I don't
> think it would be unreasonable for Subversion to do treat sparse
> working copies in the same way.
>
> --
> Philip
>
Received on 2010-01-14 22:47:06 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.