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

Re: Updating local-moves (was: svn commit: r1301390 ...)

From: Julien Cugnière <julien.cugniere_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 00:13:06 +0100

Le 16 mars 2012 21:07, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> a écrit :
> Personally, I'd be surprised if an edit/move conflict is all that
> common. Maybe you/others have some data on this? More prevalent in
> larger teams? Remote uncoordinated teams?

My two cents as a user : I often have uncommited changes sitting for a
while in a working copy, while I work on them and/or am sidetracked by
other things. This is very convenient, and works very well.

However if these changes include renames (for example a refactoring),
it becomes a nightmare. Every single time someone modifies the file I
expect the changes to go to the renamed file when I update, but of
course it doesn't happen. I have to create a patch with my local
modification of that file, revert the rename, rename again from the
new head revision, and apply the patch back. Painful.

Because of this, in my company we tend to avoid renames like the
plague. So basically for us an edit/move conflict is not that common,
but that's only because we avoid it. If subversion supported this
better, we would use renames more often.

--
Julien Cugnière
Received on 2012-03-17 00:13:59 CET

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