On 25/11/2017 16:12, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 02:42:05PM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote: >> Hi, >> >> At the Aachen hackathon I promised to write some code to spit out the sparse >> definition of a working copy, or in other words some initial dumb viewspec >> output. >> >> Testing this on a test working copy with >> [[ >> $ svn switch --list \SharpSvn\trunk > Has a new 'svn viewspec' been subcommand considered? > 'switch --list' reminds me of our 'switch --relocate' mistake > from the past ;)
Indeed it was. FWIW I agree there are good arguments for a new viewspec subcommand. The alternative would be to use "svn list --generate-viewspec" and "svn switch/checkout --use-viewspec < viewspecfile" or something like this. The obvious downside would be that one subcommand would be used to generate the viewspec while another one would be used to apply it. I think Bert brought up other arguments against adding it to "svn list". Regards, Stefan
