On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Torsten Curdt <tcu...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> Which hints that it has been moved. So what? >> <snip/> >> >> Au contraire, it wasn't moved but added anew. > > To take the nitpicking a little further: The file *was* moved - > locally. It's just that the move wasn't tracked through svn and so svn > assumes they are different files ;) > <snip/>
:-) OK, svn move. > Guess I am spoiled by using a vcs that tracks content - not files theses days. > <snap/> FWIW, our repository is SVN so we have to deal with it until that changes. >> So its harder to get the remainder of the history than it should be. > > True - it's harder. But for my own good I am bit more pragmatic here: > How likely is it that someone will ever look at that history of this > sandbox project which then might require a little more thinking vs my > time fixing the svn commit? (And why may I not do what IDEs did/do?) > <snip/> This is besides the point, but some IDEs actually do that? (I mostly use the command line svn client.) Thats terrible -- I'd almost expect if I needed history on some artifact in SVN that all of it was right there. I guess its good I never started using one of those clients :-) > If this was a bigger project and there was more than just me working > on it I probably would have weighted this differently. But as that is > not the case... so please can we just leave it at that? > <snap/> Sure, my personal opinion remains that it should have been avoided, but I am not going to fix it so happy to leave it to your judgement. -Rahul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
