If anyone cares: here's a thread from last year:
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2006-03/0806.shtml
On 10/22/07, Karl Fogel <kfogel@red-bean.com> wrote:
> "Rob van Oostrum" <rvanoo@gmail.com> writes:
> > Shouldn't the second commit fail due to that developer's working copy
> > being out of date with the repository? If the change was 2 developers
> > making the same textual change to the same file, that scenario
> > wouldn't work.
> >
> > At least from a user experience perspective, the behavior seems
> > ambiguous to say the least. Just curious what the rationale would be
> > behind SVN working this way (if this is indeed 'correct' behavior).
>
> Yeah... Double-delete has long been a special case. In some contexts,
> it should maybe conflict, in others, a conflict would be an annoyance.
> It's possibly only because of implementation concerns that making the
> same textual change conflicts while double-delete doesn't. That's a
> bit lame, and I'm not saying that I'm sure this is the right behavior,
> just that Subversion has long behaved this way, and that the issue has
> been discussed before. You might be able to dig up those past
> discussions in the archives; they might shed some more light on this.
>
> Best,
> -Karl
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Oct 22 21:19:01 2007