On Jan 5, 2006, at 10:27 AM, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
>
>> Is it possible to tell the Subversion client to use other namings for
>> the .mine and before/after-revision files, e.g.:
>>
>> foo.mine.doc
>> foo.r63.doc
>> foo.r64.doc
>>
>
>
> Now that this is being analyzed, wouldn't it be better to use
> something like:
>
> mine-foo.doc (or my-foo.doc)
> r63-foo.doc
> r64-foo.doc
>
> ... so that files with double extensions still work (tar.gz).
I am new to subversion so I may be wrong here. It seems that this is
a client issue as none of these oddly named files actually make it
into the repository, if that isn't correct, then my suggestion may
not work, but here goes:
In each individual's configuration file, they should have a list of
extensions. If a conflict occurs with a file that has such an
extension, then the new files are created by removing the extension,
appending "mine" or "r42", and then appending the extension. People
who want the default behavior simply leave the list of extensions
blank. Someone who wants this behavior could use a list like the
following list (notice that this will keep the .tar.gz together at
the end of the file).
.doc
.c
.h
.tar.gz
Just a thought,
Aaron
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jan 5 21:46:29 2006