Of course, it would make more sense to *rename* the parameter to something
more appropriate. "skip_versioned_nodes" might work.
On Oct 5, 2012 5:19 PM, "Ben Reser" <breser_at_apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 5:49 AM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
> wrote:
> > Honestly, the original phrasing of the docstring remains a better
> starting
> > point, in my opinion. Your changes lose the context that all this
> > discussion about depth and unversioned items in a versioned tree are
> still
> > tried primarily to the use of the force flag. So if it were up to me, I
> > would restore that paragraph to the state it was in and make only minor
> changes:
> >
> > * If @a force is not set and @a path is already under version
> > * control, return the error #SVN_ERR_ENTRY_EXISTS. If @a force is
> > * set, do not error on already-versioned items. When used on a
> > * directory in conjunction with a @a depth value greater than
> > * #svn_depth_empty, this has the effect of scheduling for addition
> > * any unversioned files and directories scattered within even a
> > * versioned tree (up to @a depth).
>
> Committed this unchanged.
>
Received on 2012-10-06 03:10:03 CEST