Philip Martin wrote on Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 13:45:49 +0000: > Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Philip Martin > > <philip.mar...@wandisco.com> wrote: > >> Is that sufficient? Given three files "foo", "FOO" and "Foo", one in > >> wc.db, one on disk and one on the command line, is that the same file? > >> Add another "fOO" to the database. It's now ambiguous? > > > > No, it's not: > > Is that answering the first question "same file?" or the second question > "ambiguous?" or both? > > > > > - Both fOO and foo exist in wc.db. > > - FOO is on disk. > > - I invoke 'svn <subcommand> Foo': > > 1. Is there a case-exact match in wc.db? No > > 2. Ok, then apply truepath-ing: so the user is meaning FOO. > > > > But the user can still do useful things to fOO and foo, if he gives > > the exact correct casing. > > What about the first bit. > > Given three files "foo", "FOO" and "Foo", one in > wc.db, one on disk and one on the command line, is that the same file? > > My understanding is that a Windows user expects those to be the same > file. So "svn st FOO", "svn st foo" and "svn st Foo" all refer to the > file in wc.db and the file on disk even though the cases don't match.
But normal windows programs don't have the concept of "one on disk and one in wc.db". And I imagine we want to have some syntax to refer to the latter.
