[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Feature Suggestions: Additional Revision Names UPDATED and COPIED

From: Rob Hubbard <Rob.Hubbard_at_celoxica.com>
Date: 2006-10-06 17:12:54 CEST


SVN has names for certain revisions: "HEAD", "BASE", "COMMITTED" and "PREV" (by the way, I'm not shouting).


It would be useful to be able to issue a command such as
        svn log -rUPDATED
where "UPDATED" (or "LATEST" or something similar) is to "HEAD" as "COMMITTED" is to "BASE".

That is, "UPDATED" would refer to the most recently committed revision of a given path, rather than globally in the repository. It would be the same as "COMMITTED" in a WC that is up to date.

For example, suppose
        * I have a WC of the trunk at revision 1000 on which
      * most recent revision of the trunk is 1010
      * the HEAD revision is 1015 (from a commit to some branch)

The command
        svn log -rHEAD
has an essentially empty response (which is correct).

The command
        svn log -rUPDATED
would be equivalent to
        svn log -r1010

The "UPDATED" name should be usable with URLs in addition to paths (because it is not relative to "BASE").

I'm not sure whether a "UPREV" (meaning "UPDATED-1") would also be useful.


To determine when a branch was created, the command
        svn log -rHEAD:0 --stop-on-copy
may be used. The last revision listed is the one in which the branch was created.

If that revision was represented by "COPIED" (or "CREATED" or something similar), then the command
        svn log -rCOPIED -v
would provide the required information without the many screensful (if that's a word) of additional information.

This name would also provide an alternative to --stop-on-copy.
        svn log --stop-on-copy
would be the same as
        svn log -rBASE:COPIED

(I think having a name for the revision would be more useful than an option such as "--just-at-copy".)

In this case, I don't think a "CPREV" (meaning "COPIED-1") would be useful.

(On the other hand a way of revealing the "copied-from" information might be. In this case, there would need to be a way to refer to the copied path as well as the copied revision number, but I have not thought of a good way to express that.)

I'm not sure what the behaviour of "COPIED" should be when the path or URL was not copied. Perhaps "COPIED" should then be 0.



This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service, on behalf of Celoxica Ltd.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the use of the
individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you have received
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material
immediately. Whilst this email has been swept for viruses, you
should carry out your own virus check before opening any
attachment. Celoxica Ltd accepts no liability for any loss or
damage which may be caused by software viruses or interception
or interruption of this email.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Oct 6 17:16:15 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.