Yount, Steffen wrote:
>Ok, so I can explicitly check in the file, and I do understand that the
>directory is under subversion's control, and that I shouldn't be deleting
>this directory to begin with...
>
>But, my problems are that 1) a script, which is beyond my control, is
>actually doing the deleting of that directory, 2) I don't want to do an "svn
>delete" which removes the directory from the repository side, and 3) without
>manually doing an "svn status" and sorting through the results, I won't know
>which files need to be explicitly committed.
>
>Is it acknowledged that: "svn commit" getting confused under the
>circumstances which had I described below is a bug?
>
>
Well, no, it's not a "bug", it's how Subversion manages its working
copy. If you delete .svn directories Subversion will get confused. If
the directory is getting deleted by a script, why is the directory
checked into version control at all?
>In other words I think, "svn commit" should treat all the files and the
>directories which "svn status" marks with a '!' or a '~' the same way that
>"svn commit" treats the files and the directories which "svn status" marks
>with a '?'.
>
>Am I missing some use case or other reason why the above suggested behavior
>is bad or wrong?
>
>
Well, the actual disk contents are different to what Subversion expects
them to be. Since it's a version control tool, the contents of your disk
are kind of important to Subversion! You can, as you said earlier, run
over the output from "svn status". I've done this before when getting
StarTeam and Subversion to share a single working directory (don't ask
why I had to do this, it wasn't pretty...).
Cheers,
Mike.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Feb 28 15:09:40 2004