Re: lose unversioned data with revert

Neels J Hofmeyr wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>  On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 04:07:10PM +0100, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote:
>>>  My impression was that svn tries to leave unversioned data around until 
>>> the  user takes care of it (as with 'svn delete dir'). That's 
>>> what I thought  obstructed states are for.
>> 
>>  Revert is a bit of a fine line. It is a command that is supposed to
>>  throw away local changes. So by definition is it disruptive and
>>  dangerous.
>> 
>>  However, I agree with the sentiment that revert should not delete
>>  unversioned data from disk.
> 
> What stsp said

Philip Martin wrote:

> Julian Foad <julianfoad <at> btopenworld.com> writes:
>>  Philip Martin wrote:
>>>  Neels J Hofmeyr <neels <at> elego.de> writes:
>>>>   An unversioned file should never be killed, right?
>>> 
>>>  You are explicitly reverting x, are you saying revert should fail?  My
>>>  first instinct is that revert is doing the right thing.
[...]
>>>   What about this:
>>> 
>>>  svn rm x         # delete a versioned dir
>>>  echo data > x    # add an unversioned file