This is precisely what we are looking for. For the most part, we distribute
a new executable for each update, so an overwrite is all we care about.
The main reason we are moving to SVN is because the current deployment
process uses a fileshare where updates are pushed out to. At least with
SVN, we'll have some traceability.
Thank you to everyone for your input.
Amad.
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:43 PM, <kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com> wrote:
> > I don't understand why I can't simply over-write the existing file in the
> > directory? On many occasions, a build may only result in one new
> executable.
> > To have to delete/rename the entire directory seems like overkill.
>
> While it kinda defeats the purpose of Subversion, you can use the svnmucc
> utility to "overwrite" an existing file, even with the same contents:
>
> svnmucc put test.txt http://server/kmr_test/trunk/foo/test.txt -m"Add
> file"
> r479 committed by kmradke at 2013-05-03T17:36:00.823078Z
>
> svnmucc put test.txt http://server/kmr_test/trunk/foo/test.txt-m"Overwrite file"
>
> svn log http://server/kmr_test/trunk/foo/test.txt
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r480 | kmradke | 2013-05-03 12:36:12 -0500 (Fri, 03 May 2013) | 1 line
>
> Overwrite file
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r479 | kmradke | 2013-05-03 12:36:00 -0500 (Fri, 03 May 2013) | 1 line
>
> Add file
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> svn diff -r479:480 http://server/kmr_test/trunk/foo/test.txt
>
>
> In this case no local working copy is needed, but it will happily
> let you overwrite the file with the same contents and create create
> a new subversion revision. Note that the complete file contents
> will be sent to the server each time.
>
> If you are on Windows I'm not sure what distributions include svnmucc.
> (TortoiseSVN does not)
>
> Kevin R.
>
>
Received on 2013-05-03 20:04:18 CEST