Julian Foad wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> [...]
>> Actually, I don't think that peg revisions (i.e. without following the
>> history) make much sense on objects relative to the current directory
>> (unless its URL has not changed since the peg-rev).
>
> That is the point I was trying to make:
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
[...]
> Actually, I don't think that peg revisions (i.e. without following the
> history) make much sense on objects relative to the current directory
> (unless its URL has not changed since the peg-rev).
That is the point I was trying to make: a peg rev specifier as define
On 2010-03-30 21:36:27 +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> Maybe we could some day extend peg revision syntax so that every
> component of a path can be pegged?
>
> So what Vincent wants would be something like this:
>
> $ svn cat @50/some/file.c
I almost proposed this, but the syntax would no
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 03:21:45PM -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > On 2010-03-30 12:12:59 -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> >> Interactions in the working copy with the path some/file.c only make sense
> >> if there is actually such a path in the working copy. If some/
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2010-03-30 12:12:59 -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> Interactions in the working copy with the path some/file.c only make sense
>> if there is actually such a path in the working copy. If some/file.c is
>> deleted in r51, then either it isn't in your working copy (bec
On 2010-03-30 12:12:59 -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Interactions in the working copy with the path some/file.c only make sense
> if there is actually such a path in the working copy. If some/file.c is
> deleted in r51, then either it isn't in your working copy (because you've
> updated past r
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2010-03-30 09:31:27 -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> Nobody should be trying to run 'svn cat some/fil...@50' if what they mean is
>> "follow the history of some/file.c back to r50 and cat the contents there".
>> That's just not the correct syntax for invoking the algo
On 2010-03-30 09:31:27 -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Nobody should be trying to run 'svn cat some/fil...@50' if what they mean is
> "follow the history of some/file.c back to r50 and cat the contents there".
> That's just not the correct syntax for invoking the algorithm, and no
> amount of wi
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Couldn't peg-rev be also taken into account to translate a working copy
> object into a URL? This would make sense if the parent directory has
> been renamed: as peg-rev is used to point to some object in the past,
> one should consider what the URL was in the past.
No, be
On 2010-03-29 12:36:11 -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> I was about to post that one place where there might be a lack of
> documentation is not so much in understanding what the peg revision means,
> but in understanding the "working copy path" -> "peg path" translation. The
> peg path algorithm
On 2010-03-29 17:07:36 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> I expect Vincent is asking how 'svn' interprets 'svn info
> some/deep/fil...@50'. It does accept such target specifiers (at least
> for some commands) but it's not clear how it does or should interpret
> them.
Yes, this is what I meant.
On 2010-
On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 12:07 -0400, Julian Foad wrote:
> Some possible interpretations are
>
> * Find the repository URL of './some/deep/file.c', and [...]
I'll mention a related interpretation, which is to use the repository
URL of the parent directory and append file.c to it.
This is a little
Greg Hudson wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 12:07 -0400, Julian Foad wrote:
>> Some possible interpretations are
>>
>> * Find the repository URL of './some/deep/file.c', and [...]
>
> I'll mention a related interpretation, which is to use the repository
> URL of the parent directory and append fi
C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The description of the Peg Revision Algorithm on
> >
> > http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn-book.html#svn.advanced.pegrevs
> >
> > is incomplete. It doesn't say how is identified when it is
> > relative to a working copy.
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The description of the Peg Revision Algorithm on
>
> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn-book.html#svn.advanced.pegrevs
>
> is incomplete. It doesn't say how is identified when it is
> relative to a working copy. This is particularly important when
> the
Hi,
The description of the Peg Revision Algorithm on
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn-book.html#svn.advanced.pegrevs
is incomplete. It doesn't say how is identified when it is
relative to a working copy. This is particularly important when
the directory in question has been renamed/mo
16 matches
Mail list logo
