On 9/24/2010 4:08 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>>>> Am I wrong in thinking that similar accidents happen to everyone
>>>> eventually and that a feature to fix them would be desirable?
>>>
>>> Yes, the feature has its use case. And if you'd like to see it
>>> implemented yesterday, that's cool. Just don't assume that everyone
>>> thinks the same way please.
>>
>> Can you actually name anyone who thinks it's not a useful, or
>> potentially useful feature? Anyone?
>
> I recall messages on this list from people replying to past discussions of obliterate with statements like (paraphrasing) "If you add obliterate I will lose all confidence in Subversion to be able to retain my information and I will switch to a different VCS." Clearly it is a hot topic and needs to be handled with great care. I am certain that if the developers think about the problem carefully and rationally they will come up with a great implementation that respects everybody's needs, like they have for so many other features before. But there seem to be other features currently occupying the developers' attention, so obliterate will still have to wait awhile.
I think the negative comments came from people who thought it would be a
client option, not an administrative command. Admins already have the
capability through svnadmin dump/filter/load - it is really just a
practical issue of that being too cumbersome for normal maintenance -
and tricky when the thing you want to remove was moved around early in
its life or edited into something you want to keep.
But, I agree that the implementation has to be done carefully. Even
though I think the feature is important, I would not want to give up any
reliability for it.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell_at_gmail.com
Received on 2010-09-24 23:20:49 CEST