On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 02:01:23PM +0000, Braun, Eric wrote: > I don't know why this is > should be complicated to do from the command line when GUI clients are > already doing this today.
My concern is not about whether this would be complicated to implement. It wouldn't be. My concern is that your proposal is creating a command line option that will cause a commit to succeed or fail based on the order of operations the user carried out in a working copy. svn mkdir A svn mkdir A/B svn commit --parents A/B commit succeeds svn rm A svn mkdir A svn mkdir A/B svn commit --parents A/B commit fails svn mkdir A svn mkdir A/B svn commit A/B commit succeeds svn rm A svn mkdir A svn mkdir A/B svn commit A/B commit succeeds I don't think this is intuitive behaviour. It is sensible from the point of view of your use case, no doubt. However, I'm concerned about creating an option that has inconsistent behaviour depending on working copy state. You're saying some GUI clients had this feature already. I'd like to know how they deal with the replacement and copy cases I've pointed out. I believe it's quite likely that they perform recursive commits in those cases, which defeats the point of the proposed option.
