On Aug 23, 2013, at 13:31, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Edwin Castro wrote: > >>> I can't, off the top of my head, think of a scenario where it would be >>> harmful to replace an unversioned directory with a versioned instance, >>> leaving any unversioned local files that happen to be there alone. >> >> Leaving unversioned local files alone in a directory is not the problem. > > I think it is the problem we've been discussing. Leaving them means > you have to keep the containing directory, which becomes unversioned > as you switch away from the branch having it,
Correct. > and then a conflict when > you switch back. *This* is the problem we're discussing. *This* is what Subversion should be smart enough to avoid. None of the discussion I've read thus far gives me a convincing explanation for why this should not be possible.
