Mailing-List: contact users-help@subversion.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of lesmikesell@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.128.177 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20130824190447.GB8910@ted.stsp.name>
References: <910250F21FAA2A4E8F72DD21EA7807660906CFD5@VMJudi.corp.rotair.com>
	<521665CF.7050807@gmx.us>
	<81E45292CF3BC5478E88DF55E216AD2F03B46E5E@FLONIDANPOST.flonidan.net>
	<52178B18.9050007@gmx.us>
	<CAOAgVpzE3cGpyF5QJ0L2FyKiRHTgyTP2z-RCGrDpm0-wAt2D6Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<5217A562.3020202@gmx.us>
	<54C87FD8-9CBD-41A3-9D6B-F7C1C787BB60@ryandesign.com>
	<5218656B.6020302@wandisco.com>
	<9DEB2347-7103-49A2-AC8C-51C8223C3069@ryandesign.com>
	<CAOAgVpzO2+YG1=5fe4Atc-28jLs8eRDtVEyrjcuuhYtOJJjPFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130824190447.GB8910@ted.stsp.name>
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 14:18:59 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAOAgVpwXwkzrw31jreUzp_Mj2cEpzja9LrV6mc4U=tXveMRqzg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Switching
From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com>
To: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com>,
 Ryan Schmidt <subversion-2012c@ryandesign.com>,
	=?UTF-8?Q?Branko_=C4=8Cibej?= <brane@wandisco.com>,
	Subversion <users@subversion.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Stefan Sperling <stsp@elego.de> wrote:
> 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.

Sure, other tools besides subversion do some unintuitive things...

> 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.

Yes, but it would be nice if one of the choices were to overwrite all
unversioned directories and files with identical contents (but not
files with different contents) - perhaps optionally listing any
unversioned non-conflicting files that happen to be there.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell@gmail.com