2008/5/15 Matt (MPCM) <WickedLogic_at_gmail.com>:
> Thank you for the prompt reply John.
>
> I follow what you are saying, and even how to resolve it (remove
> the .svn or simply do an export to a newly folder). Defaulting the
> export path to the current path, as a recent post suggested goes a
> long way to make this easier on the user.
>
> Every folder is it's own entity and I understand why that causes this
> issue.
>
> But for users who cannot see hidden files and may not even have any
> svn tools installed (say a shared network drive), this quickly creates
> directories that will never get flagged or noticed by those of us that
> do. Not suggesting a change of default behavior, but it does seem
> counter intuitive that it shouldn't be addressed in one manner or
> another.
It is. Check for Modifications.
> The details in Directory_A\entries should be enough to say 'There is a
> folder here that was not here before'. I did a lot of searching before
> I posted this (as it bit me recently), and it seems to be a fairly
> regular confusion. It seems that a command to check that the tree of
> entries is consistent would make sense for these cases.
>
> I don't mind poking through the code, but it sounds from your reply
> like this is a design stance? Thoughts?
Well you can't expect to mess about in a subversion working copy
behind subversion's back, and then expect it to guess what you really
meant to do.
And as an aside, why would you put a working copy on a network drive
where people who don't know what it is for can access it and change
it. That's a fairly fundamental flaw in your network security.
Simon
--
: ___
: oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
: (_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
: \ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
: /_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on 2008-05-15 22:05:45 CEST