> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Bob Archer <bob.arc...@amsi.com> > wrote: > > Bert, > > > > > > > > But, this isn't a merge it is an update. If I revert the add I lose > > all the changes I made in step 1 of my steps below. I might have made > > a few hundred changes. Granted, I probably shouldn't do the revert > > without copying the file off somewhere... but those local modifications > > I made are NOWHERE in this case and can't be recovered if my local copy of > the file is deleted. > > > > But, but ... isn't 'revert' always a lossy operation? If you revert a locally > modified file you also lose your local modifications.
But, but, shouldn't then a revert, revert back to the pristine of my working copy, which is the local file without my modifications? I'm not even seeing that, which would somewhat make sense in my head. > > OK, if you revert a normal 'add', svn will keep the local file. But as Bert > said, if > you revert an 'add with history' (A +), which seems to be the case here, svn > will just throw away whatever is there, exactly like when you revert a > Modified file. > > There is no "revert only the add, but keep the local mods" operation. Ok, but bottom line... subversion has TRASHED my local changes. This was really surprised me, and in a bad way. Granted, I only found this in a test and didn't actually lose important modifications. BOb
