On 16/07/2009 13:49, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Christopher Clarke wrote:
>>>> Why should this delete the file locally from anyone else's working copy?
>>> Ummm, because it is a versioned file and the point of a versioning
>>> system is to make that happen...
>> I don't want it to be a versioned file any more, for a good reason.
>
> On the other hand, you told the version control system to make sure that
> it is versioned.
Yep, oops, need to undo now.
> Even if this were a reasonable thing to be able to do,
> would you want anyone with commit access to be able to 'unversion'
> existing files in a way that others won't notice?
Yes, please.
> So, for example,
> updated existing working copies might continue to build where a fresh
> checkout would no longer contain everything needed.
I understand. That's fine.
>>>> Why not just leave it in all working copies too?
>>> What should you expect to happen when someone jumps their working copy
>>> back and forth between the times when the file was/wasn't versioned
>>> (something versioning systems are supposed to do predictably)?
>> I expect the file to jump back and forth between a versioned state
>> (replacing the contents if appropriate) and an unversioned state.
>
> And you must see the problem with that. The 'unversioned' state is also
> undefined - whether it exists or not might depend on what the previous
> revision number had been - and it certainly won't be the copy with the
> local changes you are doing this to preserve.
Again, that's ok.
Thanks,
Chris
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=2371844
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-07-16 20:18:20 CEST