On Dec 4, 2004, at 8:00 PM, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
>
> On Dec 4, 2004, at 5:20 PM, Max Bowsher wrote:
>>
>> "svn switch" and "svn switch --relocate" are *VERY* different. (In
>> retrospect, they should have been two different subcommands.) Run
>> "svn switch --help" for an explanation.
>>
>
> They're so different, in fact, we considered putting them into
> separate subcommands. Take a look at the end of the book -- the
> reference section on 'svn switch'. It has examples and more detailed
> explanation of the difference:
>
> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.1/re27.html
Ok, just to make sure I have this absolutely correct...
--relocated is used only to tell the working copy that the location
that corresponds to it in the repository has changed, but it is in fact
the same branch just with a new URL.
Whereas without --relocate you are telling the working copy to 'become'
a working copy of a different branch.
Is that it?
If that's generally correct, I guess the regular (non-relocating) 'svn
switch' updates the files in your working copy based on the differences
between the 'from' and 'to' branches, adding or removing the changes
that are part of the branch-to-branch diff, but leaving your local
changes.
I've only ever used the --relocate version, since I reorganized the
repository a couple times before I was comfortable with the layout.
In my case I was moving around the trunk of my project - (e.g.
trunk/Project to Project/trunk) so it remained in the same repository
but with a new path. I think --relocate was the correct thing to do in
that case (it didn't cause any problems). So when I read Max's
statement "relocating from one in-repos path (trunk) to another
(branches/trading_5_3_nv). Thats *very* bad." I was concerned.
Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Dec 5 22:41:36 2004