OK, now we understand. At first I assumed you were running "update" on the root of the main working copy. When you run "update" on the external directory itself, then I expect it to update to head. This is because, as the book says, the external directory behaves as a separate working copy.
You suggest that the behaviour of: update --externals=ignore should be the same as "--ignore-externals". But I don't think you want the same behaviour that "--ignore-externals" currently has. Currently it only ignores external definitions that it finds inside the target WC; it doesn't check whether this target WC that it starts looking at is already an external within some outer WC. I think you want Subversion to notice if the target being updated is an external inside another working copy, and to ignore this whole update if so. The idea that the external should not behave like a completely separate WC but more like it is part of the same working copy is a good idea, in concept. The implementation could be difficult, and backward compatibility is a concern, but this is certainly an idea that is worth thinking about. I think your set of "--externals=..." options is too complex. The UI should be much simpler, something like just one option that says whether the revision specified on the update command should override the revision specified by the external definition. The idea of invoking an interactive prompt is overkill. - Julian On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 11:36 +0200, Stephen Butler wrote: > On May 6, 2011, at 11:06 , Julian Foad wrote: > > > On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 23:18 +0200, Roman wrote: > >> Hi Branko, hi Julian > >> > >> @Branko: I know the -r feature of the svn:externals and it worked fine > >> on checkout (both formats <1.5 and >=1.5). But when updating the without > >> special switches it did update to the head regardless whether the > >> external was pinned to a revision or not. > > Hi Roman, > > What is your svn:externals value? Using TortoiseSVN (or any other client > I've tested), the following syntax pins the externals version as expected: > > http://example.com/svn/foo/bar@99 foobar > > Changes to the "bar" directory (in the repository) after version 99 are not > sent to the local "foobar" directory when I update it. > > Regards, > Steve > > >> To be honest, we did not test with the command line client but with > >> TortoiseSVN and PushOk. Both behaved the same, which lead me to the > >> conclusion, that it is a normal svn behaviour. > >> > >> @Julian:Yes, I guess so. checkout would retrieve the pinned revision, > >> update would update to the head. At least that is what we experienced. > >> Would you consider this a wrong behaviour? > > > > Yes, I would consider that wrong behaviour. > > > > I haven't tested to see what 'svn' actually does and I am not sure how > > it was originally designed to work. > > > > - Julian > > > > -- > Stephen Butler | Senior Consultant > elego Software Solutions GmbH > Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25 | 13355 Berlin | Germany > tel: +49 30 2345 8696 | mobile: +49 163 25 45 015 > fax: +49 30 2345 8695 | http://www.elegosoft.com > Geschäftsführer: Olaf Wagner | Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 77719 | USt-IdNr: DE163214194 > >
