Johan Corveleyn wrote on Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 23:10:21 +0200: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> > wrote: > > Johan Corveleyn wrote on Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 01:08:24 +0200: > >> 2011/4/22 Branko Čibej <br...@e-reka.si>: > >> > Meh. For now, just hack a special case so that committing one half of a > >> > case-only rename will automagically commit the other half. Shouldn't be > >> > too hard to do, and it's almost impossible to do the wrong thing -- > >> > after all, you're constrained by a) staying in the same directory, and > >> > b) both halves of a rename resolving to the same on-disk file on a > >> > case-insensitive file system. > >> > >> Sounds like another option. A small change here and there to make > >> case-only renames work specifically (and not solve the more general > >> problem of fixing path-guessing via wc-db or truepaths). > >> > >> The fact of the matter is that, for sane setups/companies, > >> case-clashes are going to be really rare, *except when doing case-only > >> renames*. A repository holding 'Foo', 'FOo' and 'FOO' would be a > >> repository that's un-checkoutable on a case-insensitive filesystem > >> anyway. So I'd expect companies that have to support case-insensitive > >> clients to keep real case-clashes out of their repository (or fix them > >> as soon as they are discovered). > >> > >> So maybe "case-only rename" (and perhaps "case-only replace" > >> (delete+add w/o history)) is the only use-case we need to go for. But > >> apart from commit, we should maybe also make "revert" possible, as > >> well as adding to and removing from changelists ... (hm, commit would > >> be the main thing I guess, revert can always be done in two steps > >> (revert the add, then the delete), changelists ... oh well). > >> > > > > Another use-case: > > > > When r1 contains a file 'Foo', r2 contains a file 'foo', the working > > copy is at uniform revision r2, and the user types 'svn up -r1 Foo'. > > > > There is also a variant where Foo@r1 is a directory rather than a file, > > but that's getting contrived. > > And I guess 'Foo' no longer exists in r2, and 'foo' didn't exist in > r1? Maybe 'Foo' got renamed to 'foo'? Or maybe there is no historical > relationship? > > Anyway, I think this also works right now, without any special tricks: > > - 'svn up -r1 Foo' gets canonicalized to 'svn up -r1 foo', the file > on-disk, and currently present in the working copy. > > - If 'foo's ancestor is 'Foo', 'foo' gets deleted and 'Foo' is > downloaded from the repository, by the update editor. > > The update editor currently has no problems with handling case-only > renames on case-insensitive filesystems. >
Sorry for not being clear. In my example I intended 'foo' and 'Foo' to be two separate lines of history. % svnadmin create r1 % svn co file://`pwd`/r1 wc1 % cd wc1 % svn mkdir iota % svn ci -m r1 % svn rm iota % svn mkdir IOTA % svn ci -m r2 % svn up -r2 % option #1: svn up -r1 iota % option #2: svn up -r1 iota IOTA For option #1, I specified 'iota', so I expect svn to error out saying "You asked me to create ./iota but I can't because ./IOTA exists" (never mind whether or not it's versioned). Option #2 is what I'd expect to work to get me iota@1 (at the expense of shifting IOTA@2 to not-present(?) state, but that's the best I can do given the filesystem's limitations). It's probably a bit tricky unless we can ensure the editor sends IOTA before iota, though... > Cheers, > -- > Johan
