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

Re: svn commit: r1434913 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c

From: Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 11:20:48 +0100

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Ben Reser <ben_at_reser.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl> wrote:
>> I think
>> $ svn mv A B
>> $ svn mv B A
>> Will now store moved_from and moved_to in the same record, at the op-depth of A.
>> (Or copy_tests.py move_file_back_and_forth wouldn't show moved_from and moved_to on a single node using status using the code snippet here)
> This seems really ugly to me:
> $ svn status
> R + A
> > moved to A
> > moved from A

Yeah, pretty ugly ... but perhaps it's not much uglier than the
solution in 1.7 (without move tracking):

$ svn status
R + A

Ideally svn should see that this "self-replacement with history" is
perhaps better represented as a simple Modification.

This is related to issue #3429 [1] ("svn mv A B; svn mv B A" generates
replace without history). I.e. in svn <= 1.6 this would be a replace
without history, causing much pain for users that inadvertently break
lines of history this way (especially in shops that do much
refactoring, moving around, ...). This was finally solved in 1.7 by
retaining the move information, so at least the line of history isn't
broken anymore. But making a Modification out of it would be even
better I guess :-).

[1] http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3429

Received on 2013-01-18 11:21:40 CET

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.