[Subversion Wiki] Update of "MultiLayerMoves" by StefanSperling

[Apache subversion Wiki <co...@subversion.apache.org>]

Dear Wiki user,

You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Subversion Wiki" for change notification.

The "MultiLayerMoves" page has been changed by StefanSperling:
http://wiki.apache.org/subversion/MultiLayerMoves?action=diff&rev1=7&rev2=8

Comment:
show a different way of recording the B/F -> B/G move

  
  It would be possible to both of these in the same working copy, either A to C then A to B, or A to B then B to C and we end up with three moves recorded A->B, A/F->B/G and C/F->C/G. There is an inconsistency, we record C/F to C/G but not B/F to B/G. Does this matter? Perhaps it is wrong to record A/F->B/G, perhaps we should be recording B/F->B/G instead?
  
+ If we recorded moves-in-copies within the copy, the above move A to B and B/F to B/G would look as follows:
+ 
+ || op-depth || local-relpath || presence     || moved-to ||
+ ||    0     ||    A          || normal       ||          ||
+ ||    0     ||    A/F        || normal       ||          ||
+ ||    1     ||    A          || base-deleted ||  B       ||
+ ||    1     ||    A/F        || base-deleted ||          ||
+ ||    1     ||    B          || normal       ||          ||
+ ||    1     ||    B/F        || normal       ||          ||
+ ||    2     ||    B/F        || base-deleted ||  B/G     ||
+ ||    2     ||    B/G        || normal       ||          ||
+