On 17.03.2012 11:25, Stephen Butler wrote: >>> Somewhat off-topic, but "svn update" has the serious problem that it's >>> impossible to revert to the state before the update if one had local >>> changes. Most of these "pick sane defaults" kinds of discussions would >>> become moot if one could have some kind of client-side snapshot that let >>> revert be something more than just an all-or-nothing proposition. >> That's a great suggestion, I agree that would be a very good >> improvement. It would allow to have more control, but only if you need >> it (in case you noticed after the fact that something went wrong, and >> you can back up step by step). > There was talk about a "local commit" feature a while back. I bet most > of the user who like that feature would actually be satisfied by an > 'svn undo-update' command.
Are you assuming that "undo update" would be easier to do than "local commit" (I prefer the term "savepoint", but teal.bikeshed.com)? :) -- Brane
