On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 5:06 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > >> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com> >> wrote: >> >> > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 8:13 AM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 11:02 AM Marvin Humphrey < >> mar...@rectangular.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > >> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 7:21 AM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org >> > >> > >> wrote: >> > >> > All, >> > >> > >> > >> > Did anyone change something recently in SVN? I pulled this morning >> and >> > >> got >> > >> > back a larger than expected amount of content. It seems like the >> > whole >> > >> > site tree's been duplicated. >> > >> >> > >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1746519 >> > >> >> > >> >> > > :-( >> > > >> > > Any thoughts on how to fix this? Is it just a matter of deleting a >> > > directory tree? >> > >> > Yeah, it's just `svn rm FULL_URL`. I took care of it. >> > >> > Please folks: always preview before you commit. With Subversion, >> > that's `svn diff`. >> > >> >> The way to revert without causing a huge update is to remove the target >> tree, and >> svn cp -r{rev-before-break} https://s.a.o/r/a/tlp/o/trunk >> https://s.a.o/r/a/tlp/o/trunk >> which basically backspaces between what was messed up to what should now >> be >> present, which is usually a minimal delta to most people's checkouts >> > > Those instructions are completely wrong :-( > > There were changes after the breakage, and the above would have reverted > those. >
And note: even if you caught it before further changes were made, by removing trunk, then copying another trunk back in ... it *completely* messes with history. "trunk" would be based on a copy, and that is a *significant* change. Such copies are why "svn log" has a switch named --stop-on-copy. So no. Never rm trunk and copy from old. Use reverse merges. -g
