This is precisely what we are looking for. For the most part, we distribute a new executable for each update, so an overwrite is all we care about.
The main reason we are moving to SVN is because the current deployment process uses a fileshare where updates are pushed out to. At least with SVN, we'll have some traceability. Thank you to everyone for your input. Amad. On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:43 PM, <kmra...@rockwellcollins.com> wrote: > > I don't understand why I can't simply over-write the existing file in the > > directory? On many occasions, a build may only result in one new > executable. > > To have to delete/rename the entire directory seems like overkill. > > While it kinda defeats the purpose of Subversion, you can use the svnmucc > utility to "overwrite" an existing file, even with the same contents: > > svnmucc put test.txt http://server/kmr_test/trunk/foo/test.txt -m"Add > file" > r479 committed by kmradke at 2013-05-03T17:36:00.823078Z > > svnmucc put test.txt http://server/kmr_test/trunk/foo/test.txt-m"Overwrite > file" > > svn log http://server/kmr_test/trunk/foo/test.txt > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > r480 | kmradke | 2013-05-03 12:36:12 -0500 (Fri, 03 May 2013) | 1 line > > Overwrite file > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > r479 | kmradke | 2013-05-03 12:36:00 -0500 (Fri, 03 May 2013) | 1 line > > Add file > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > svn diff -r479:480 http://server/kmr_test/trunk/foo/test.txt > > > In this case no local working copy is needed, but it will happily > let you overwrite the file with the same contents and create create > a new subversion revision. Note that the complete file contents > will be sent to the server each time. > > If you are on Windows I'm not sure what distributions include svnmucc. > (TortoiseSVN does not) > > Kevin R. > >
