>>>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.
>>Either that or the mentioned warning to use svn revert instead. My preferred
>>way would be the cvs-way to only delete files if given a flag. Like that it's
>>sure that the user wants to delete the file locally.
>
>What you are describing *is* the current behaviour in this situation (uncommitted changes), and yet apparently not what the OP expected.
>
>At some point you have to allow users to shoot themselves in the foot if they try hard enough.
You're right that using --force will delete the file eventually. The problem in
this case is that svn delete (without --force) didn't work in the first place
as opposite action to svn add. If that had removed the added status of
the file "we" wouldn't even have thought about using the --force flag. I
now know how the current behaviour is, but I can assure you that it
won't take long until the next poster comes with the same problem.
bye Fabi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Apr 19 13:15:18 2006