[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: Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 14:08:14 +0100

On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Stephen Butler <sbutler_at_elego.de> wrote:
> On Mar 17, 2012, at 1:14 , Johan Corveleyn wrote:


>> Don't git and mercurial and others just apply the changes to wherever
>> the code moved to, regardless of the container? Do those users often
>> complain about that behavior? (I don't know, it's just a question)
> When you run 'git rebase', which is a lot like 'svn update', you aren't
> allowed to have any uncommitted changes, so reverting to the prior
> state is always possible. †Of course, a DVCS has the luxury of local
> commits. †And they don't have to handle mixed revisions, either.

Ok, but suppose I renamed Foo.java to Bar.java, and committed that
locally into my repository. Then on 'git rebase' one of the changes
that comes in is a change to Foo.java. I suppose that change gets
applied automatically (except if there are text conflicts) to Bar.java
in my repository, right?

Whether it's a local commit or an uncommitted change doesn't really
matter, I think. The question on how to automatically merge those
things remains the same. The only difference is that you can more
easily undo stuff step by step if you have local commits of course,
which may make it less problematic if the "automatic heuristic"
doesn't follow your intentions ...

Received on 2012-03-17 14:09:07 CET

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