On 24.08.2013 21:26, Travis Brown wrote:
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 09:04:48PM +0200, Stefan Sperling claimed:
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 10:22:41AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
Don't forget that it was subversion, not the user, that created the
directory and abandoned it in the first place.
If a previously versioned directory is left behind unversioned, that
means there are unversioned (aka obstructing) nodes within the
directory, such as files created during a build. Those files could
not have been created by svn.

I hope that we will eventually extend tree conflict handling to the
point where it makes these kinds of situations trivial to resolve,
even for novice users. svn should interactively offer a set of
reasonable courses of action, such as removing the unversioned nodes,
or moving them to a special lost+found area, or something else that
allows incoming versioned nodes to be created in their place.
That's just overcomplicating the issue. This doesn't even need to
become a tree conflict. There seems to be confusion about what is
actually needed to solve the OP's original problem and to make svn
switch symmetric. I've attached a simple patch which solves the issue in
the method that I proposed.

I already explained at length why this solution is absolutely the wrong approach. It solves a small subset of cases at the cost of causing serious grief to users in the majority of cases. Let's please just stop discussing this approach because it is not viable.

-- Brane

Branko ─îibej | Director of Subversion
WANdisco // Non-Stop Data
e. brane@wandisco.com