On 24.06.2013 17:52, Branko Čibej wrote:
> You're breaking the once rule here.
>
> And the case you're describing can never occur. You cannot have a
> working copy that describes what you're doing. Tree mutations can only
> be parallelized across distinct subtrees, which isn't the case in your
> example; where the operations interact, they must be sequential or they
> don't mean anything.
>
> Your case is either:
>
> A->A2; A2/B -> B2
>
> or
>
> A/B -> B2; A -> A2
>
> which happen to be the two simplest sequences of working copy changes
> that'll generate your end result.
Add to the mix the "parents before children" rule and only the first
case remains valid. So we get:
alter_dir . (removes A, adds A2 and B2)
move A A2
alter_dir A2 (removes B)
move A2/B B2
The above sequence does not violate the once rule.
-- Brane
--
Branko Čibej | Director of Subversion
WANdisco // Non-Stop Data
e. br...@wandisco.com
