Hi all,
likely I just have got a wrong impression from the --force switch in
svn move and reading about copy/move in book & mails & tutorials,
but what is the best practice?
-- Most I read about svn copy was copy to a (new) branch, then
commit the branch, to my understanding before any other work on
the branch. Is that the correct use of svn copy?
-- Should this go similarily for svn move? Or does the --force
switch I have to use to move a modified file just has the purpose of
a security layer (modifications may have been intended for the
current, not a new place)?
I can't tell much about program code, though I suppose there are
the same issues, but with webpages
-- a file copied to some other place likely has to be edited to work
OK in the new place (e.g. w/o modifications links would go stale).
The same goes for moved files. In either case it wouldn't make
much sense to me to commit before those modifications have been
done as otherwise I would end up with a revision practically
deliberately broken.
-- in most cases I know beforehand I want to move/rename some
file. But usually I don't know what all has to go with it, e.g.
images, duplicates in other places. So my workflow is to search
the web project for all related dependencies and occurances (links
and other references), make all the necessary changes in all
places, including the file(s) to be renamed, and only then do the
move/rename and commit. Which now requires the --force switch.
Is that OK with SVN or are there implications or hidden traps with
this workflow?
TIA for any insights/suggestions.
Jan Hendrik
---------------------------------------
Freedom quote:
Der Preis der Größe heißt Verantwortung.
-- Sir Winston Churchill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-07-22 11:45:03 CEST