>
> If the whole process is under your control, a better approach would be to
> always separate the version-controlled source/original/template copies from
> the local/processed/active copy that you don't want controlled. That is,
> you might check in/out a template-D directory and have your script create a
> new localized D directory with the files used and modified at runtime. That
> way you don't have to affect the originals and pretend you didn't later and
> you always can distinguish the template when you do want to commit changes
> to it.
>
> Thanks for the response, Les. I'm not sure I 100% iunderstand what you're
saying as a solution to the problem posed. Are you saying something like:
have a 2-step process for each modification, e.g. first create the directory
locally through whatever process, and then second, sometimes when it is
sdesired to check in changes, copy the re-created thing, file by file, back
to the version that is under control? (Sorry if I don't what you're
suggesting.)
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=1024878
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-01-16 17:24:21 CET