[Fwd: Re: Poor performance in windows. Switching back to CVS]

[Mike Brenner <mi...@mitre.org>]

Sorry, somehow this response did not go to the list.

Re: [Fwd: Re: Poor performance in windows. Switching back to CVS]

[Adrian Howard <ad...@quietstars.com>]

On 15 Feb 2007, at 14:34, Mike Brenner wrote:
[snip]
> My teams and I often take work home for the weekend
> then go through the hassle of attempting to check
> them back in on Monday -- it would be cool
> if svn could handle this use case more easily,
> and recover from the unnecessary conflicts
> more easily.
[snip]

You might want to consider using SVK. It handles offline-working and  
pulling/pushing stuff from Subversion repositories. I use it myself  
for offline work and find it works well.

Adrian

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: [Fwd: Re: Poor performance in windows. Switching back to CVS]

[Les Mikesell <le...@gmail.com>]

Mike Brenner wrote:
 > My teams and I often take work home for the weekend
 > then go through the hassle of attempting to check
 > them back in on Monday -- it would be cool
 > if svn could handle this use case more easily,
 > and recover from the unnecessary conflicts
 > more easily.

It should be extremely rare, even if theoretically possible to have an 
incorrect file timestamp that accidentally exactly matches the 
unmodified version of the file.  Is this a real problem or are you 
having some other kind of conflict?  If you take the whole working copy 
including the .svn directories, perhaps the timestamps are being changed 
on the unmodified pristine copies.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell@gmail.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org