You can not svn copy between repositories ( or from a repos other than
the one the wc is from ). The point of svn copy is to retain the
history of the source file, but this can not be done across repositories.
Instead you should simply export the files from one repository, then add
them to the other. You might want to read the section in the subversion
book about vendor branches.
Gunther Popp wrote:
> I´m puzzled by the behaviour of svn copy URL WC using a URL from another
> Repository than the one of the WC
> (client and server running version 1.2.3).
> The scenario is as follows:
> * I checked out a WC from Repository svn://localhost/test
> * This WC now contains a directory src/java
> * I try to copy source files from ANOTHER repository using svn copy:
> >cd src/java
> >svn copy svn://localhost/e2etrace/trunk/src/java/e2etrace
> A e2etrace\timer
> A e2etrace\timer\ITimer.java
> Ausgecheckt, Revision 2.
> svn: Quell URL 'svn://localhost/e2etrace/trunk/src/java/e2etrace' ist
> aus einem fremden Projektarchiv; lasse sie als getrennte Arbeitskopie
> The message in German states that URL
> svn://localhost/e2etrace/trunk/src/java/e2etrace belongs to another
> repository (BTW, it would be cool to have some sort of unique message
> IDs in subversion to prevent misunderstandings caused by translated
> status and error messages). In consequence the client decides to
> checkout a new working copy in the path src/java/e2etrace of my existing
> working copy. The new working copy points to the repository
> svn://localhost/e2etrace and cannot be added to my test repository, of
> course. This at least does not match the documentation which states:
> Copy a file in a working copy or in the repository. /SRC/ and /DST/ can
> each be either a working copy (WC) path or URL:
> WC -> WC Copy and schedule an item for addition (with history).
> WC -> URL Immediately commit a copy of WC to URL.
> -->> URL -> WC Check out URL into WC, and schedule it for addition. <<--
> URL -> URL Complete server-side copy. This is usually used to branch and
> Is this the desired behaviour? Is it safe to have a working copy inside
> another working copy?
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Thu Dec 15 04:12:40 2005