I'm a new SVN user. I just checked in a small project to a
repository. All the functions I tried work s not real problems
But, I did not think until now that I should have excluded files such
as core files and logs and autoconf's cache from version controls. I
now know how to a global ignore a
On Sep 22, 2010, at 20:21, Chris Albertson wrote:
> But, I did not think until now that I should have excluded files such
> as core files and logs and autoconf's cache from version controls. I
> now know how to a global ignore and a ignore foe one directory but how
> to remove these files from
On Sep 22, 2010, at 8:21 PM, Chris Albertson wrote:
> But, I did not think until now that I should have excluded files such
> as core files and logs and autoconf's cache from version controls. I
> now know how to a global ignore and a ignore foe one directory but how
> to remove these files from
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:43 AM, David Huang wrote:
>
> On Sep 22, 2010, at 8:21 PM, Chris Albertson wrote:
>> But, I did not think until now that I should have excluded files such
>> as core files and logs and autoconf's cache from version controls. I
>> now know how to a global ignore and a i
> -Original Message-
> From: Nico Kadel-Garcia [mailto:nka...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 23 September 2010 12:40
> To: David Huang
> Cc: Chris Albertson; users@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Best way to "un-version control" a file?
>
> On Thu, Sep
On 9/23/2010 6:53 AM, Tony Sweeney wrote:
svn rm --keep-local filename
Which is thoughtful, but does *NOT* get old versions of the
file out of the repository. Unfortunately, that's been
requested before, and has never gotten into working code that
I can find. The idea is called "obliterate",
> I'm a new SVN user. I just checked in a small project to a
> repository. All the functions I tried work s not real problems
>
> But, I did not think until now that I should have excluded files
> such
> as core files and logs and autoconf's cache from version controls.
> I
> now know how to a g
On Sep 23, 2010, at 6:40 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:43 AM, David Huang wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 22, 2010, at 8:21 PM, Chris Albertson wrote:
>>> But, I did not think until now that I should have excluded files such
>>> as core files and logs and autoconf's cache from v
Les Mikesell wrote on Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 09:29:31 -0500:
> And if it isn't for subversion, it is likely only because the request
> has been ignored and put off for so long that everything thinks it is
> hopeless to ask again.
In other words: regardless of what people actually say and do, you
On 9/23/2010 12:00 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote on Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 09:29:31 -0500:
And if it isn't for subversion, it is likely only because the request
has been ignored and put off for so long that everything thinks it is
hopeless to ask again.
In other words: regardless o
Les Mikesell wrote on Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:27:40 -0500:
> Am I wrong in thinking that similar accidents happen to everyone
> eventually and that a feature to fix them would be desirable?
Yes, the feature has its use case. And if you'd like to see it
implemented yesterday, that's cool. Just
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote on Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:27:40 -0500:
>> Am I wrong in thinking that similar accidents happen to everyone
>> eventually and that a feature to fix them would be desirable?
>
> Yes, the feature has its use case. And if yo
On Sep 24, 2010, at 12:17 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Daniel Shahaf
> wrote:
>> Les Mikesell wrote on Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:27:40 -0500:
>>> Am I wrong in thinking that similar accidents happen to everyone
>>> eventually and that a feature to fix them woul
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 9:26 AM, David Huang wrote:
>
> On Sep 24, 2010, at 12:17 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Daniel Shahaf
>> wrote:
>>> Les Mikesell wrote on Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:27:40 -0500:
Am I wrong in thinking that similar accidents happen t
David Huang wrote on Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 02:26:18 -0500:
> On Sep 24, 2010, at 12:17 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Daniel Shahaf
> > wrote:
> >> Yes, the feature has its use case. And if you'd like to see it
> >> implemented yesterday, that's cool. Just don
On 9/24/2010 2:26 AM, David Huang wrote:
Am I wrong in thinking that similar accidents happen to everyone
eventually and that a feature to fix them would be desirable?
Yes, the feature has its use case. And if you'd like to see it
implemented yesterday, that's cool. Just don't assume that e
On Sep 24, 2010, at 00:17, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Daniel Shahaf
> wrote:
>> Les Mikesell wrote on Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:27:40 -0500:
>>> Am I wrong in thinking that similar accidents happen to everyone
>>> eventually and that a feature to fix them would be
On 9/24/2010 4:08 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
Am I wrong in thinking that similar accidents happen to everyone
eventually and that a feature to fix them would be desirable?
Yes, the feature has its use case. And if you'd like to see it
implemented yesterday, that's cool. Just don't assume that
Les Mikesell wrote on Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 16:19:55 -0500:
> I think the negative comments came from people who thought it would be a
> client option, not an administrative command.
Today it is a client command (as in: 'svn obliterate $URL'), with a hook
script that has to explicitly allow it (j
On Fri, 2010-09-24 at 02:26 -0500, David Huang wrote:
>
> On Sep 24, 2010, at 12:17 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Daniel Shahaf
> > wrote:
> >> Les Mikesell wrote on Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:27:40 -0500:
> >>> Am I wrong in thinking that similar accidents h
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Daniel Shahaf
> wrote:
> > Les Mikesell wrote on Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:27:40 -0500:
> >> Am I wrong in thinking that similar accidents happen to everyone
> >> eventually and that a feature to fix them would be desirable?
> >
> > Yes, the feature has its use ca
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Bob Archer wrote:
> As a users I think this would be useful... but I would not put it at the top
> of my wish list. If I "really" need to get something out of the repo it is
> possible with dumpfilter.
Yes, but a dumpfilter means taking your repository down whil
22 matches
Mail list logo
