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

svn st: 'R' - clarification needed

From: Jan Hendrik <list.jan.hendrik_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:53:09 +0200


I did some testing on this and it seems it does things the way I
need/want; however, as I don't do maneuvres like this very often I'd
like to get some confirmation before going from the sandbox to the

working copy updated to rev. 10;
svn mv foo oldfoe
svn cp bar foo

svn st now marks foo as replaced which is all right.

When looking at the logs later on (in e.g. rev. 15) will the log for
oldfoo indeed know that oldfoe origined in foo as of rev. 10, and
going back to the foo added in rev. 5, probably by copying bar back

And will the log for foo know that the current foo in rev. 15 origins in
bar as of rev. 10?

My tests seem to confirm this, but I may miss some implications.

Background is that some time ago in a web project I copied some
content pages to a non-public folder for extensive editing (copy A-
>X), changing the content in the original place to a temporary text
which was revised repeatedly and now shall be made permanent,
but under a new name, while at the same time the revised copies
are moved into their original place (rename A->B, rename X->A).
svnmucc is no option as the whole operation requires some further
editing. Committing after A->B is not preferred as it would result in
a state of dead links which shall continue to point to the final
(revised) A after X->A. B will be linked to on its own.


Freedom quote:

     Individuality is either the mark of genius or the reverse.
     Mediocrity finds safety in standardization.
               -- Frederick E. Crane


To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-07-22 12:54:26 CEST

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