Re: Confusing update + commit semantics

> I came across the following confusing subversion behavior. When an svn
> user
> uses the "svn update" command to return a particular file in a directory,
> with other modified files, to an older revision (i.e., "down-date" it) and
> then uses the "svn commit" command to commit the whole directory, the
> commit
> command silently ignores the file with the older revision, but commits the
> other modified files in the directory, leaving the user with the
> impression
> that this older revision is also committed (unless explicitly checking the
> "sending" entries). Is this the intended behavior?

Yes. No changes were made to the older file, so there was nothing to commit.
What you're looking for is:
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.1/ch04s04.html#svn-ch-4-sect-4.2

> My collegues expect (or
> desire) the "down-dated" file to either be committed anew or have
> something
> like a sticky tag to prevent commit. How can I get to that desired
> behavior?

bye,

Erik.

-- 
Lust, ein paar Euro nebenbei zu verdienen? Ohne Kosten, ohne Risiko!
Satte Provisionen für GMX Partner: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/partner
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org