Well - I first did:
svn mv a/ b/
then a bunch of other changes in b/
then tried
svn commit
but when I tried the commit it told me the working copy was out of date, so
I did an update. the update didn't seem to do anything much, but when I
tried to commit again it failed. I have had problems with svn mv all day
long to be honest, and I'm sorry I was a little petulent, today has been one
long nightmare. (I'm working at 9:17pm on Sunday, what more do I need to
say ;).
svn mv seems to get angry when you try and do anything else along with it.
I have been refactoring code and updating interfaces, so I've been moving
stuff around and making superficial changes to classes in my source.
To me it seems a little wierd that it told me that my working copy was out
of date as I only have one working copy in which changes are being made
currently, so I don't know how it could have been out of date.
I don't know how much help that is.
(more comments further down...)
On 7/30/06, Garrett Rooney <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
>
> On 7/30/06, Alex Turner <armtuk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You know, for an atomic SCM, subversion sure as hell seems to leave my
> > working directories screwed up a little too often:
> >
> > svn: Invalid change ordering: new node revision ID without delete.
> >
> > Well - I sure as hell typed the commands in the right order, it's not
> too
> > hard: svn mv a b.
> >
> > How many other people have had to check out a new working copy and copy
> > changes over and commit because their working copy was broken _again_
> > without any explanation provided and a cryptic error message that
> doesn't
> > really explain what the problem actualy is?
> >
> > Is there any hope that Subversion will improve on the current state of
> > affairs or should we all be looking to shell out for a commercial scm
> that
> > works more often?
>
> Unfortunately, you've hit a bug. Sorry, it happens, even in
> commercial scms. Welcome to the real world, where things are
> occasionally imperfect.
I don't know if this is helpfull at all but accurev keeps a log of all the
things that have happened to the repo and to the working copy so that if a
problem arrises you can just mail the log to the developers and they can
figure out what happened. Would it be usefull if svn had something similar?
If you can provide a sequence of commands that gets your repository
> and working copy into that state (i.e. something that starts from an
> empty repository and makes it happen) I'll be happy to look into
> fixing the problem. Unfortunately, you haven't actually provided much
> information in your email other than "I get this weird error when I do
> something", so it's rather difficult for me to determine what the
> problem is based on it.
I do appreciate that SCM is a very very difficult problem to solve well, and
svn does a pretty good job overall, which I do appreciate. It sure is a
hell of alot better than CVS or VSS!
-garrett
>
Thanks,
Alex
Received on Mon Jul 31 03:29:19 2006