Strictly speaking, Bob should get a conflict, because his working copy's
BASE isn't the HEAD. But what happens when he does "svn update"? I would
expect that it would move foo.txt to its new name, as modified by Bob. Or
rather, I expect that it would abort with an error and complain that it was
being told to rename a file that had local modifications, and the user
needed to specify --force.
Dale
-----Original Message-----
From: kfogel@newton.ch.collab.net [mailto:kfogel@newton.ch.collab.net]On
Thomas Hallgren <thhal@tigris.org> writes:
> I'm new to subversion. I'd like to know how the following scenario is
> handled:
>
> Bob checks out a project.
> Bob edits the file foo.txt.
>
> Bill checks out the same project (and version) as Bob.
> Bill moves the foo.txt to directory bar.
> Bill makes some changes to bar/foo.txt.
> Bill commits his changes.
>
> Bob commits his changes.
Bob should get a conflict, because the file he's committing to is no
longer there.
Subversion does not silently move the change to the new location.
(Even after Subversion gets real merge-tracking, it's not definite
that it should do this.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Nov 10 19:19:59 2004