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
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk