On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Daniel Shahaf <danielsh_at_elego.de> wrote:
> Philip Martin wrote on Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 13:45:49 +0000:
>> Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com> writes:
>> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Philip Martin
>> > <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
>> >> Is that sufficient? Given three files "foo", "FOO" and "Foo", one in
>> >> wc.db, one on disk and one on the command line, is that the same file?
>> >> Add another "fOO" to the database. It's now ambiguous?
>> > No, it's not:
>> Is that answering the first question "same file?" or the second question
>> "ambiguous?" or both?
>> > - Both fOO and foo exist in wc.db.
>> > - FOO is on disk.
>> > - I invoke 'svn <subcommand> Foo':
>> > 1. Is there a case-exact match in wc.db? No
>> > 2. Ok, then apply truepath-ing: so the user is meaning FOO.
>> > But the user can still do useful things to fOO and foo, if he gives
>> > the exact correct casing.
>> What about the first bit.
>> Given three files "foo", "FOO" and "Foo", one in
>> wc.db, one on disk and one on the command line, is that the same file?
>> My understanding is that a Windows user expects those to be the same
>> file. So "svn st FOO", "svn st foo" and "svn st Foo" all refer to the
>> file in wc.db and the file on disk even though the cases don't match.
> But normal windows programs don't have the concept of "one on disk and
> one in wc.db". And I imagine we want to have some syntax to refer to the
uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy
Received on 2012-01-24 14:58:01 CET