On 25.08.2005, at 17:20, Robert Cronk wrote:
>> The idea is that you can svn delete the top of the current tree,
>> then copy
>> revision 36 to replace it, preserving the file history. Subversion
>> lets
>> you do this.
>>
>> If you're talking about removing revisions entirely, that's another
>> problem. With what's being suggested here, revisions 37-41 will still
>> exist in the repository, but they will be hidden and you'll never
>> see them
>> again except if you were to export some revision in that range.
>
> What if you were to merge the changes backwards from 41 back to 36 and
> then check that in? That would not destroy anything. That is the
> first
> thing that came into my mind when I saw the original question. I
> think
> it would look something like this:
>
> svn merge -r41:36 .
> svn ci -m"Backing out changes from 41 back to 36"
>
> At that point, the tree should look just like 36 but would be 42
> and you
> would have a complete history of what just happened. However, since I
> am a noobie, I will need someone more experienced to give me
> feedback on
> this technique and syntax.
That's also what I would have done. The original delete-and-copy
suggestion doesn't sit well with me, because it ignores the
possibility of someone else committing changes while this reversion
is going on.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 25 17:37:19 2005