On 2/24/06, Vincent Lefevre <vincent+svn@vinc17.org> wrote:
> On 2006-02-23 22:06:17 -0500, Andy Levy wrote:
> > On 2/23/06, Vincent Lefevre <vincent+svn@vinc17.org> wrote:
> > > On 2006-02-23 18:32:44 +0000, Phil Endecott wrote:
> > > > > Now the million dollar question. I hated what I did with revision 16
> > > > > and want to bring back revision 15 of just that file.
> > > >
> > > > svn merge -r 16:15 index.html
> > >
> > > Or something like "svn delete ..." and "svn cp -r15 ..." so that
> > > revision 16 of the file seems to have never existed?
> >
> > Revision 16 will always exist in the repository (by design), and
> > deleting and then copying will (I think) lose the history chain from
> > revision 15 to 17.
>
> Yes, this is what I meant. In such a way one won't see rev 16 in the
> log of the file in HEAD and it will be invisible to "svn blame", if
> this is what one wants...
Then I think you're talking about obliterating that revision entirely,
which is something that cannot be done today without dumping, editing,
and reloading.
> > IMHO, better to use the reverse merge than a delete/copy.
>
> Why better?
It keeps (in my view, anyway) the history of everything that happened
to the file completely intact. So that if I need to go back in a few
weeks because I forgot *why* something was a bad idea, the whole thing
will be logged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Feb 24 14:24:03 2006