Sorry if this comes through twice, but it didn't seem to send yesterday.
Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> Eric Hoch wrote:
>> Also, there was another developer working on the old path, and when
>> she attempted to commit her changes to the now non-existant path, she
>> received the same message. She then attempted an update and received
>> the same message, but only after several files were deleted from her
>> working copy, including files which had changed and were not yet
>> comitted. She tried to revert, but obviously that would do no good
>> since those changes existed only in the working copy. Is that the
>> expected behavior?
>> Finally, what would be the best way to handle changes like this in the
>> future, to avoid the issues outlined above?
>
> Do a merge from the weird tags/*/trunk directory to /trunk instead of
> attempting to re-arrange things, and set up a
> svnperms.conf/svnperms.py/pre-commit set of hook scripts to block
> people from updating tags.
>
Unfortunately, it's not yet time to merge back into the trunk, as it
represents the last phase of development, and is still being worked on.
I could have just waited until it was time to merge, but I decided the
chances that I would forget about it were too great. Oh well, if I
didn't make mistakes, I wouldn't have any to learn from. As far as
svnperms.py goes: since we are hosting on a windows server, python must
first be installed, which has to be approved by MIS. I'm just using the
authz method added in 1.3 for now.
-Eric
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri May 5 15:34:01 2006