Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> I do not see that Misha is asking for Subversion to treat different
> working copies differently. Rather, he is asking for Subversion to
> treat a symlink in a working copy differently than Subversion
> currently treats symlinks.
But in one working copy there is a symlink and another working copy
there would not be a symlink. How can allowing that state to exist not
be treating working copies differently?
>
> I'm just trying to clarify the user's request, not saying I agree with
> it. :-)
>
> There has been talk previously of handling this different symlink
> behavior via a new svn property. But this does not make sense because
> the symlink is not in the repository; it is only in a working copy.
>
Exactly - the repository would somehow have to maintain both the concept
that it is a symlink so as not to turn it
into a plain file with the contents in the "magic" working copy where
this setup originates and the contents of the target for everybody
else. But in a new checkout, how would you know if you wanted a
replacement for your magic working copy where the symlinks work or an
imitation where the symlinks are changed to the contents of the target?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell_at_gmail.com
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=2374632
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-07-23 02:02:53 CEST