On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:35 AM, David Cournapeau < david@ar.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp> wrote:
Pauli Virtanen wrote:
Yes, if you know to look for it. But in Git it was obvious what happened, since its data model is simpler, so I looked first at it :)
Oh, yes, definitely :) I felt safer to check that svn reported this as well, though.
Does
svn rm file:///.../yo/trunk svn cp file:///.../yo/trunk@5660 file:///.../yo/trunk
work then?
I guess it would, but I am afraid it would horribly break the whole history (the file ids would be different).
I'd rather try to restore the trunk tree to 5660 and commit on top of that; otherwise you can't do
svn diff -r 5660:5661 test_basic.py
since SVN thinks 5660 lives in a different directory than 5661 although the directories have the same name...
Rewriting/restoring the repository is technically better, because we can erase the error, and it is guaranteed it won't break any history-related features in svn. But I don't know what it means for people who have checked out revision 5661 before the rewriting, which worries me a bit. Maybe that's not very important.
The diffs on trac for r5656-r5660 look valid. Just download them and patch the files. Chuck