On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 03:55:00PM -0400, Bob Archer wrote: > > I would like to propose to add a way to abort updates in case of an > > conflict. > > This could be done by adding e.g. an abort command to the interactive > > conflict resolution. This should transform the working copy to the situation > > before the update that resulted in an conflict happend. > > > > The reason I would like to have this is because on a project I work on it > > regularly happens that one committer accidently reverts changes made by > > other that result in an conflict. In this case usually the easiest way to > > fix this is > > to (partially) revert the conflicting commit and then update. Therefore it > > would be nice to be able to abort an update that results in a conflict, > > wait for > > the other commiter to revert the conflicting commit and update then. > > Are you sharing working copies? I'm pretty sure that is not a supported use > case for subversion... so requesting something change due to a non-supported > use case isn't going to happen.
No. The problem results from vim failing to reload a changed document after svn up. E.g.: Joe opens foo.tex with revision 1 Jane commits revision 2 of foo.tex Joe updates foo.tex, but vim fails to notice. Joe changes something unrelated to Jane's commit and saves foo.tex in vim. Joe commits revision 3 of foo.tex, which contains the contents of revision 1 in the section Jane is working on. Jane changes something in her section. Jane updates to revision 3, but this results in a conflict. What I would like to have is that Jane can now abort the update and ask Joe to fix the repository contents with another commit that reverts the changes from revision 3 so that Jane can cleanly update after Joe commited the clean revision 4. Regards Till