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

Re: svn commit: r1002271 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/include/svn_client.h

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 19:52:28 +0200

julianfoad_at_apache.org wrote on Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 17:16:59 -0000:
> Author: julianfoad
> Date: Tue Sep 28 17:16:59 2010
> New Revision: 1002271
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1002271&view=rev
> Log:
> * subversion/include/svn_client.h
> (svn_client_move4): Document the current rather than the historical
> behaviour of the 'force' flag. A follow-up to r1002260.
>
> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/include/svn_client.h Tue Sep 28 17:16:59 2010
> @@ -3892,11 +3892,10 @@ svn_client_move5(svn_commit_info_t **com
> * move_as_child set to @c FALSE, @a revprop_table passed as NULL, and
> * @a make_parents set to @c FALSE.
> *
> - * If @a src_path is a working copy path:
> - *
> - * - If one of @a src_paths contains locally modified and/or unversioned
> - * items and @a force is not set, the move will fail. If @a force is set
> - * such items will be removed.
> + * Note: The behaviour of @a force changed in r860885 and r861421, when the

Given that's it's a public API's docstring, wouldn't it make more sense
to talk here in terms of release numbers than revision numbers?

i.e., "the behaviour of @a force changed in 1.7.2 (r860885 and r861421) ..."

> + * 'move' semantics were improved to just move the source including any
> + * modified and/or unversioned items in it. Before that, @a force
> + * controlled what happened to such items, but now @a force is ignored.
> *
> * @since New in 1.4.
> *
>
>
Received on 2010-09-28 19:53:53 CEST

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