On Tue, 2010-09-28, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > [email protected] wrote on Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 17:16:59 -0000: > > Author: julianfoad > > Date: Tue Sep 28 17:16:59 2010 > > New Revision: 1002271 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1002271&view=rev > > Log: > > * subversion/include/svn_client.h > > (svn_client_move4): Document the current rather than the historical > > behaviour of the 'force' flag. A follow-up to r1002260. > > > > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/include/svn_client.h Tue Sep 28 17:16:59 > > 2010 > > @@ -3892,11 +3892,10 @@ svn_client_move5(svn_commit_info_t **com > > * move_as_child set to @c FALSE, @a revprop_table passed as NULL, and > > * @a make_parents set to @c FALSE. > > * > > - * If @a src_path is a working copy path: > > - * > > - * - If one of @a src_paths contains locally modified and/or unversioned > > - * items and @a force is not set, the move will fail. If @a force is > > set > > - * such items will be removed. > > + * Note: The behaviour of @a force changed in r860885 and r861421, when the > > Given that's it's a public API's docstring, wouldn't it make more sense > to talk here in terms of release numbers than revision numbers?
+1. r1004212. The behaviour changed version 1.5. Thanks. - Julian > i.e., "the behaviour of @a force changed in 1.7.2 (r860885 and r861421) ..." > > + * 'move' semantics were improved to just move the source including any > > + * modified and/or unversioned items in it. Before that, @a force > > + * controlled what happened to such items, but now @a force is ignored. > > * > > * @since New in 1.4.
