> From: 'Daniel Shahaf' [mailto:d...@daniel.shahaf.name]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:53 PM
>
> I am sure similar points were made on dev@ when the 'svn add
> foo@' problem was discussed there last year (that's part of the reason I
> asked you to search for already-filed issues before filing
Варфоломеев Игорь wrote on Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 06:40:39 +0400:
> > From: 'Daniel Shahaf' [mailto:d...@daniel.shahaf.name]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 5:45 AM
> >
> > The question is whether we should not be parsing peg revisions in some
> > places. The target arguments to 'add' seem like
Варфоломеев Игорь wrote on Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 05:22:49 +0400:
> > From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d...@daniel.shahaf.name]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 9:30 PM
> >
>
> > Can you please file an issue for this?
>
> OK. I've just created the issue:
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.c
> From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d...@daniel.shahaf.name]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 9:30 PM
>
> Can you please file an issue for this?
OK. I've just created the issue:
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4392
Thank you!
> (It's probably "bar@" that's the correct desination n
I agree that it's a bug that, given a file 'foo', when 'bar' does not
exist[1],
svn copy foo bar@
and
svn move foo bar@
don't create a destination file with the same name. (It's probably
"bar@" that's the correct desination name in this case.) Can you please
file an issue for this?
Thank
