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

Re: Switching

From: Travis Brown <travisb_at_travisbrown.ca>
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 12:26:41 -0700

On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 09:04:48PM +0200, Stefan Sperling claimed:
>On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 10:22:41AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Don't forget that it was subversion, not the user, that created the
>> directory and abandoned it in the first place.
>If a previously versioned directory is left behind unversioned, that
>means there are unversioned (aka obstructing) nodes within the
>directory, such as files created during a build. Those files could
>not have been created by svn.
>I hope that we will eventually extend tree conflict handling to the
>point where it makes these kinds of situations trivial to resolve,
>even for novice users. svn should interactively offer a set of
>reasonable courses of action, such as removing the unversioned nodes,
>or moving them to a special lost+found area, or something else that
>allows incoming versioned nodes to be created in their place.

That's just overcomplicating the issue. This doesn't even need to
become a tree conflict. There seems to be confusion about what is
actually needed to solve the OP's original problem and to make svn
switch symmetric. I've attached a simple patch which solves the issue in
the method that I proposed. I've tested it manually and it's fine, but
I haven't run it through the test suite and haven't covered the
directory permission difference case. I'm not sure it is even desirable
to check the directory permissions.


  • application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on 2013-08-24 21:27:39 CEST

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.