On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:24 PM Nathan Hartman
wrote:
> All of this would happen only if svn:project is set on that directory. If
> not, then "svn branch" and "svn tag" are not valid commands and will error
> out, while "svn merge" and "svn switch" continue to work as they do today,
> namely
I disagree: I still use svn because of its centralized nature and good
native out-of-the-box handling of large binary files. Git will never really
check those boxes.
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 4:02 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:42 PM wrote:
> >
> > FWIW, I found the
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:42 PM wrote:
>
> FWIW, I found the explanations in these two emails from the same thread to be
> easier to understand as a user:
> https://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2010-11/0408.shtml
> https://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2010-11/0466.shtml
>
> This sounds like yet
bryce.scho...@gmail.com wrote on Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 09:41:37 -0700:
> FWIW, I found the explanations in these two emails from the same thread to
> be easier to understand as a user:
> https://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2010-11/0408.shtml
> https://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2010-11/0466.shtml
>
>
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 09:41:37AM -0700, bryce.scho...@gmail.com wrote:
> FWIW, I found the explanations in these two emails from the same thread to
> be easier to understand as a user:
> https://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2010-11/0408.shtml
> https://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2010-11/0466.shtml
>
FWIW, I found the explanations in these two emails from the same thread to
be easier to understand as a user:
https://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2010-11/0408.shtml
https://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2010-11/0466.shtml
This sounds like yet another UX flaw caused by the constraints of
subversion's
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 6:55 PM Bryce Schober wrote:
>
> I just noticed that whenever we do a remote rename (from URI to URI, as
> opposed to in a working copy), svn add mergeinfo that didn't exist before. It
> doesn't do this for renames in a working copy. Is this by design, or by
> accident?
I just noticed that whenever we do a remote rename (from URI to URI, as opposed
to in a working copy), svn add mergeinfo that didn't exist before. It doesn't
do this for renames in a working copy. Is this by design, or by accident?
