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 <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> > > wrote: > >> 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 everyone > >> thinks the same way please. > > > > Can you actually name anyone who thinks it's not a useful, or > > potentially useful feature? Anyone? > > I suspect what was meant is that not everyone thinks obliterate needs > to be "implemented yesterday" or that it's the "#1 request". I do > think obliterate would be useful, but I personally have not ever > needed it in my 2 or 3 years of administering an SVN repo, and don't > forsee needing it in the future. >
/me nods > Also, it's not like the SVN team has rejected the feature; the FAQ > mentions that it's planned: > http://subversion.apache.org/faq.html#removal and there's even > a roadmap for it: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf//subversion/trunk/notes/obliterate/plan-milestones.html Work was started in trunk (conditioned on the compile-time -D SVN_WITH_EXPERIMENTAL_OBLITERATE switch), but it hasn't been touched in the last few months. I wasn't aware of the latter URL, but it contains a "milestones (achieved/planned)" table which I assume is accurate.
