Re: mixed revision working copy -- rationale?

On May 17, 2005, at 11:38 AM, Bob Proulx wrote:

> Why doesn't an 'svn commit' also automatically 'svn update'?

This proverbial horse has been beaten many times.

It doesn't do an update because it has unintended side effects.

> But what I cannot find any documentation on is *why* this behaves this
> way. It has been a confusing point for many users. At the time of
> the commit your working copy must be up to date with the repository
> and so an update at that point would not be slow as it would not be
> copying any significant data. At that instant it would seem to mostly
> just be bookkeeping.

This is incorrect. Your working copy if up to date with the
repository only for the nodes that were committed. Other nodes may be
out of date, and an update on commit would pull new revisions that
you didn't ask for.

Jim

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue May 17 18:18:36 2005