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

Re: Outdated check in import?

From: Hyrum K Wright <hyrum.wright_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 16:14:54 -0500

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 9:47 AM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
> On 04/19/2012 01:37 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
>> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>> I guess I don't see this as "whack-a-mole with 'svn
>>> import'".  'svn import' is treated uniquely because it is
>>> genuinely unique -- no other Subversion operation tries to
>>> directly replicate unversioned data in the repository without
>>> first "staging it" in the working copy state.  The only other
>>> thing
>>> that comes close is 'svn mkdir URL' (which, by the way, doesn't
>>> appear to be
>>> disallowing the creation of .svn/ directories ... oops!).
>> And
>>   svn copy --parents ... $URL/foo/.svn/bar
>>   svn move --parents ... $URL/foo/.svn/bar
>> All four of these commands are "genuinely unique" in this common way :-P
> Yeah, copy and move occurred to me in the shower this morning.  So much for
> uniqueness.  :-(

Not to mention the fact that the check as currently constructed is

If you do an import with the ASP_DOT_NET_HACK (or whatever it's
called) enabled, the import will error on _svn, *not* .svn, whereas
the standard procedure would like _svn slip right by. This is all
crazy since this is strictly a repository operation, and shouldn't be
dependent upon client-side specifics. Good luck getting that all to
behave as advertised in a mixed-platform environment.


uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy
Received on 2012-04-21 23:15:31 CEST

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