You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Jack Bates <ms...@freezone.co.uk> on 2007/08/01 23:16:33 UTC
svn:ignore version controlled resource
I understand the svn:ignore property currently doesn't apply to
resources already under version control, but our project is in this
common situation: http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html#ignore-commit
We've worked around it, as suggested, by creating a "databases.yml.tmpl"
file and removing "databases.yml" from version control, but I can't
figure out for what reason the svn:ignore property shouldn't apply to
version controlled resources?
Thanks, Jack
Re: svn:ignore version controlled resource
Posted by "C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>.
Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> To answer Mike Pilato's question directly, I think the definition of
> "ignoring a versioned file" is:
>
> "receives updates as usual, but is never committed (unless listed as
> an explicit target)."
That's a somewhat arbitrary definition of "ignore", which I reject outright
because I'm in a mood to do so. :-)
And as for explicit listing being the toggle for "okay to commit", as I
point out in issue #2858, that only works for command-line users --
TortoiseSVN *always* explicitly lists *every* committed thing.
--
C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Re: svn:ignore version controlled resource
Posted by Ben Collins-Sussman <su...@red-bean.com>.
To answer Mike Pilato's question directly, I think the definition of
"ignoring a versioned file" is:
"receives updates as usual, but is never committed (unless listed as
an explicit target)."
This seems to be what users ask for, over and over and over.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn:ignore version controlled resource
Posted by "C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>.
I've filed issue #2858 to track this idea.
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2858
Wascally Wabbit wrote:
> +1 vote for such a new property. It would work wonders on "shared and
> baselined" files that each developer might tweak locally but doesn't
> want to commit w/ local mods accidentally. Files like IDE touchable
> control files and other application configuration files come to mind.
> ClearCase has such a feature and it is still missed years after we
> switched to Subversion...
>
> -The Wabbit
>
> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> Jack Bates wrote:
>>> I understand the svn:ignore property currently doesn't apply to
>>> resources already under version control, but our project is in this
>>> common situation: http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html#ignore-commit
>>>
>>> We've worked around it, as suggested, by creating a "databases.yml.tmpl"
>>> file and removing "databases.yml" from version control, but I can't
>>> figure out for what reason the svn:ignore property shouldn't apply to
>>> version controlled resources?
>>
>> In a sense, it does. svn:ignore is defined to be a collection of
>> patterns
>> for files which should not be added to version control. And sure enough,
>> Subversion will not add to version control any
>> already-added-to-version-control files that match svn:ignore. :-)
>>
>> On a more serious note, though, what would the proposed new definition of
>> svn:ignore be? Versioned-and-modified files don't get committed, but do
>> they get updated? Do they get omitted from 'svn log' reports?
>> "Ignore" is
>> a strong verb, and if taken to the extremes implied by that verb for
>> versioned files, I really don't see much point in versioning them. I
>> *could*, however, see us growing a new property which is set on a
>> particular
>> file (instead of on its parent directory) that says, "Please don't commit
>> me" or "Please don't commit me unless you --force it" or "Please don't
>> commit my text until after you commit the removal of this property" or
>> somesuch.
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
--
C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Re: svn:ignore version controlled resource
Posted by Wascally Wabbit <wa...@earthling.net>.
+1 vote for such a new property. It would work wonders on "shared and
baselined" files that each developer might tweak locally but doesn't
want to commit w/ local mods accidentally. Files like IDE touchable
control files and other application configuration files come to mind.
ClearCase has such a feature and it is still missed years after we
switched to Subversion...
-The Wabbit
C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Jack Bates wrote:
>> I understand the svn:ignore property currently doesn't apply to
>> resources already under version control, but our project is in this
>> common situation: http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html#ignore-commit
>>
>> We've worked around it, as suggested, by creating a "databases.yml.tmpl"
>> file and removing "databases.yml" from version control, but I can't
>> figure out for what reason the svn:ignore property shouldn't apply to
>> version controlled resources?
>
> In a sense, it does. svn:ignore is defined to be a collection of patterns
> for files which should not be added to version control. And sure enough,
> Subversion will not add to version control any
> already-added-to-version-control files that match svn:ignore. :-)
>
> On a more serious note, though, what would the proposed new definition of
> svn:ignore be? Versioned-and-modified files don't get committed, but do
> they get updated? Do they get omitted from 'svn log' reports? "Ignore" is
> a strong verb, and if taken to the extremes implied by that verb for
> versioned files, I really don't see much point in versioning them. I
> *could*, however, see us growing a new property which is set on a particular
> file (instead of on its parent directory) that says, "Please don't commit
> me" or "Please don't commit me unless you --force it" or "Please don't
> commit my text until after you commit the removal of this property" or somesuch.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn:ignore version controlled resource
Posted by "C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>.
Jack Bates wrote:
> I understand the svn:ignore property currently doesn't apply to
> resources already under version control, but our project is in this
> common situation: http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html#ignore-commit
>
> We've worked around it, as suggested, by creating a "databases.yml.tmpl"
> file and removing "databases.yml" from version control, but I can't
> figure out for what reason the svn:ignore property shouldn't apply to
> version controlled resources?
In a sense, it does. svn:ignore is defined to be a collection of patterns
for files which should not be added to version control. And sure enough,
Subversion will not add to version control any
already-added-to-version-control files that match svn:ignore. :-)
On a more serious note, though, what would the proposed new definition of
svn:ignore be? Versioned-and-modified files don't get committed, but do
they get updated? Do they get omitted from 'svn log' reports? "Ignore" is
a strong verb, and if taken to the extremes implied by that verb for
versioned files, I really don't see much point in versioning them. I
*could*, however, see us growing a new property which is set on a particular
file (instead of on its parent directory) that says, "Please don't commit
me" or "Please don't commit me unless you --force it" or "Please don't
commit my text until after you commit the removal of this property" or somesuch.
--
C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand