Hyrum K Wright wrote on Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 13:57:28 +0000: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Daniel Shahaf <danie...@elego.de> wrote: > > 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. > > @WORKING ?
I'm not sure this addresses the question of 'what object is identified by the the stem (ie, path sans peg)'. Perhaps wc.db:/FOO? (using the pseudo-drive syntax, so this isn't currently in use for anythin)
