Re: Merge information in ls OR "svn ls -v -g"

2012-05-09 Thread Mark Phippard
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:08 AM, James Hanley wrote: > There's no interest/descending/rebuttal opinion to this?  Should I > create a enhancement ticket? I thought that this was the medium to > first propose changes/enhancements for discussion. My 2 cents would be that I do not see the need or valu

Re: Merge information in ls OR "svn ls -v -g"

2012-05-09 Thread James Hanley
There's no interest/descending/rebuttal opinion to this? Should I create a enhancement ticket? I thought that this was the medium to first propose changes/enhancements for discussion. On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 4:16 PM, James Hanley wrote: > All, > > I'm raising the issue that there should be an op

Merge information in ls OR "svn ls -v -g"

2012-04-30 Thread James Hanley
All, I'm raising the issue that there should be an option to include merge information of an "ls -v" in much the same way that "svn blame" supports it. Although, I can easily use "svn blame -g" to find out who /originally/ added a file, it's not intuitive, the more natural method (IMHO) is to use