On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 08:23, Vincent Lefevre<vincent+svn_at_vinc17.org> wrote:
> On 2009-08-12 11:01:15 +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> Yes. Editors that simply ignore and overwrite concurrent file
>> modifications made by other tools (such as Subversion) are no fun.
>> So make sure your developers are using editors that handle this
>> gracefully, or have them exit their editor before running svn update.
>
> Yes, but this isn't sufficient. I suspect that some users do
> the following:
> 1. Copy the file somewhere else (e.g. on a USB key).
> 2. Do some "off-line" editing. And when they come back:
> 3. Do "svn up".
> 4. Copy the edited file to the working copy (with "cp").
>
> (Now I wonder whether a Subversion aware "cp" should be provided,
> to warn the user against possible damage if the destination is a
> versioned file.)
But what guarantees that the user will use this version?
There's only so far any software can go in protecting the user from
himself. At some point, the user has to be held accountable for the
commands he issues & workflow he uses.
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=2382879
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-08-12 14:33:54 CEST