On Apr 18, 2006, at 19:27, Scott Palmer wrote:
> Does anyone else think that the strategy of immediately removing
> (deleting) files that are added but not committed is not consistent
> with the idea that svn delete will not remove unversioned or
> modified items?
>
> I think it makes more sense for "svn delete" to behave like "svn
> revert" in the case of added but not committed files, because
> obviously it is an operation that WILL lose unversioned data.
No, I think it's a bad idea for "svn delete" to behave one way
sometimes and another way other times. It's better for it always to
behave one way, which is to delete the file in question and to update
the working copy to indicate that the file should be removed from the
repository at the next commit. In the OP's case where the file was
not already in the repository, but was merely scheduled for addition,
a helpful message should be issued which educates the user:
"You cannot 'svn delete foo' because foo is not yet in the
repository. If you want to revert the scheduled addition of foo, use
'svn revert foo'."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Apr 18 22:43:47 2006