A file with a change: svnadmin create repo svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc svn mkdir --parents wc/A/B echo foo > wc/A/B/f svn add wc/A/B/f svn ci -mm wc echo bar > wc/A/B/f svn ci -mm wc
Start with the old, delete an ancestor, update the file: svn up -r1 wc svn rm wc/A svn up wc/A/B/f With 1.7 the update raises a tree-conflict because the text of a deleted file is changing: $ svn1.7 up wc/A/B/f Updating 'wc/A/B/f': C wc/A/B/f At revision 2. Summary of conflicts: Tree conflicts: 1 With trunk the update gives: $ svn up wc/A/B/f Updating 'wc/A/B/f': U wc/A/B/f U wc/A/B Updated to revision 2. We have a spurious notification for A/B (it's still at revision 1) and no tree-conflict. Is the absence of a tree-conflict the correct behaviour? The user did explicitly request the update so perhaps we don't need it. If the absence is correct what if the update target was A/B? Would we need a tree-conflict on A/B/f in that case? -- Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads: http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
