0

Using svn, here is a little intro of my situation:

  • My working copy is at revision XX.
  • Someone added a directory and images at revision YY.
  • On revision ZZ, I deleted those images (but not the directory) to add a property svn:ignore for all images.

Is there a way to update a working copy from revision XX to revision ZZ without deleting those images. The images are still used, but are not needed to be versionned.

yvoyer
  • 7,476
  • 5
  • 33
  • 37
  • No, see e.g. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5490228/will-svn-delete-keep-local-also-keep-the-file-from-being-removed-on-update or http://stackoverflow.com/questions/610809/making-the-folder-unmanaged-by-svn – blahdiblah Jun 02 '11 at 18:39
  • @blahdiblah: `svn delete --keep-local` is of no use for me, since the files are already deleted on the repos. – yvoyer Jun 02 '11 at 19:08
  • I know, both those questions were about the same general problem you have--wanting a --keep-local option for svn update. – blahdiblah Jun 02 '11 at 20:27

1 Answers1

1

the easiest is to copy them outside the directory, do your update, then copy them back in as now-unversioned files. The simplest solution is often the best.

Or you could just update and let the system delete them, then fetch them from where-ever the master versions of them are stored.

Lastly, I think you can update the directory with a sparse option to ignore children, then the directory gets the update state, but the contents are not affected. I imagine a further update to the directory (with a deeper operation) will keep the files afterwards as technically, they're already removed from the directory. Don't quote me on that one -try it.

gbjbaanb
  • 51,617
  • 12
  • 104
  • 148
  • I used the copy method, but I was just wondering if there were some other ways. Thanks for the feedback. – yvoyer Jun 13 '11 at 17:44