From: James Sharpe (james.sharpe_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-24 14:05:42
2008/5/24 Jens Seidel <jensseidel_at_[hidden]>:
> Calling "svn up" from the current directory would update all
> subdirectories. So release/ would be deleted and release_last/ created.
> After this the new release/ is fetched.
But that's assuming that you have the branches directory checked out,
if you don't then the following case applies:
> If "svn up" is called from inside release/ nothing would happen, as the
> content of this directory (with URL .../release_last_at_HEAD) was not
but would the URL be release_last_at_HEAD? I don't think subversion would
update the working url in this case? I don't think it would in this
case without doing a switch or switch --relocate (at least not with
versions <= 1.4 I don't know about 1.5).
I don't really find renaming obscure, its just that I think that
subversion is just rather bad at dealing with it due to the fact you
need two pieces of information(url and revision number) to uniquely
identify a piece of code whereas git just uses one: a SHA1 hash.
> Do you have experiences with git-svn? Maybe by importing Boost's code?
Yes I do. I'm currently using git-svn with Gnome (I'm doing google
summer of code with them).
I thought I'd imported Boost's trunk at one time, but checking now it
appears I've only got the sandbox+branches. I'll have a go at doing
the main trunk but obviously it'll take some time. If I'm successful
I'll quite happily make the repository available for people to try out