Re: svn move, was: Databinding itest reorg proposal
On 3/16/07, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ah, apollogies for that. I have to admit that I'm a cvs person at > heart so > just getting to grips with svn. I ljust ooked up svn move and got > that "why > didn't I look there first" feeling, so I'll remember that for next > time. > Thanks for taking the time to explain. If you're new to Subversion I highly recommend reading this: http://svnbook.red-bean.com/ There's an Appendix on "Subversion for CVS Users" :-) -- Jeremy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cool. Thanks Jeremy
Re: svn move, was: Databinding itest reorg proposal
Ah, apollogies for that. I have to admit that I'm a cvs person at heart so just getting to grips with svn. I ljust ooked up svn move and got that "why didn't I look there first" feeling, so I'll remember that for next time. Thanks for taking the time to explain. If you're new to Subversion I highly recommend reading this: http://svnbook.red-bean.com/ There's an Appendix on "Subversion for CVS Users" :-) -- Jeremy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: svn move, was: Databinding itest reorg proposal
On 3/15/07, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Mar 15, 2007, at 3:34 PM, Simon Laws wrote: > I forgot to mention that the reason that so many XML files have > suddenly > appeared is that I've take the files that currently live in / > interop and > renamed and refactored them. Thanks for explaining as this did look a bit odd. One way to avoid that is to use "svn move" to move the files rather than adding them again. When you do that, SVN shows that the file was copied from somewhere else in the repo and so it is fairly clear that it isn't a new work but just a derivative. This also has the advantage that the history of the file is maintained so users can track changes even across the move. It has an even bigger benefit in that it makes life easier for the lawyers, and a happy lawyer is much nicer to have than a grumpy one :-) Some IDEs which grew up with CVS don't seem to realize that SVN allows them to just move things rather than delete old and add new (losing history in the process). If that's the case, then you can still get the benefits of moving through the svn command. -- Jeremy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ah, apollogies for that. I have to admit that I'm a cvs person at heart so just getting to grips with svn. I ljust ooked up svn move and got that "why didn't I look there first" feeling, so I'll remember that for next time. Thanks for taking the time to explain. Regards Simon
svn move, was: Databinding itest reorg proposal
On Mar 15, 2007, at 3:34 PM, Simon Laws wrote: I forgot to mention that the reason that so many XML files have suddenly appeared is that I've take the files that currently live in / interop and renamed and refactored them. Thanks for explaining as this did look a bit odd. One way to avoid that is to use "svn move" to move the files rather than adding them again. When you do that, SVN shows that the file was copied from somewhere else in the repo and so it is fairly clear that it isn't a new work but just a derivative. This also has the advantage that the history of the file is maintained so users can track changes even across the move. It has an even bigger benefit in that it makes life easier for the lawyers, and a happy lawyer is much nicer to have than a grumpy one :-) Some IDEs which grew up with CVS don't seem to realize that SVN allows them to just move things rather than delete old and add new (losing history in the process). If that's the case, then you can still get the benefits of moving through the svn command. -- Jeremy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
