Re: --dry-run

On Tue, 2004-04-13 at 14:29, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

> Right. Could svn --dry-run commit print the same output?

> Exactly. could svn --dry-run update print out the exact same thing
> here, too?

I guess it *could*, but you're the first person in 4 years to ever
notice or care (or at least mention it). Maybe you could persuade the
dev@ list that this is a pressing UI issue...?

> The users are
> just used to doing stuff like "cvs -n update", and having
> "svn --dry-run update" do the same thing (i.e. print out what
> svn status -u prints) would reduce retraining.

There's a limit here, too. SVN is supposed to be *similar* to CVS, but
not an exact clone. The model is the same, the subcommands are mostly
the same, but we deliberately changed things that we thought were broken
(like separating 'status' and 'update' functionality, for example, or
removing the distinction between global and per-subcommand switches).

So I guess what I'm trying to say is: "feature X should be more like
CVS" isn't *necessarily* a compelling argument in and of itself. If you
think that a bunch of cranky CVS users are going to be able to learn SVN
with zero retraining, you're being unrealistic. :-)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Apr 13 21:42:45 2004