RE: Updating after an uncommitted move

Hi Kevin.

Doh, my bad.

Subversion 1.2.1 on Redhat 9.

Subclipse 0.9.34 on Eclipse 3.1 on WindowsXP.

Greg.

  _____

From: Kevin Slater [mailto:kevin.slater@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 22 September 2005 11:25 AM
To: users@subversion.tigris.org
Subject: Re: Updating after an uncommitted move

I think it depends on how the Subclipse guys handled it. If they were
attempting to implement an "snv mv" under the covers, then I think it's a
bug . (What version are you using by the way?)

...Kevin

On 9/21/05, Mark Phippard <MarkP@softlanding.com> wrote:

> If I move a class to a new folder but don't commit it and then do an
update that includes
> modifications to the file I've moved, the update recreates the file in
its original spot but also
> leaves the one I've moved in it's new place.
>
> Is this expected behaviour I'm supposed to manually handle or should the
updates be merged
> into the file at its new location?

As I understand things, that is the expected behavior. There is similar
behavior if you had local updates to a file and you did an update where
someone else had moved the file. In that case, the local file become
unversioned so your changes are not lost.

Mark

____________________________________________________________________________
_
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. and SoftLanding Europe Plc by IBM
Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
____________________________________________________________________________
_

-- 
-- "Thank God for Microsoft" - Linus Torvalds