Whole tree up to date before committing

[Matthew D. Fuller]

On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:38:18AM +0200 I heard the voice of
Óscar Fuentes, and lo! it spake thus:
> 
> I repeat that bzr policy is the right one, but it cannot be applied
> to some projects, so subversion's model is a reasonable trade-off.

That's not really the case, though.  The developer (when told he needs
to 'update' before commit) runs 'update'.  This takes a few seconds.
If there aren't any conflicts, he can just commit, and he'll be in the
same place as he was with svn; it may be broken due to those outside
changes, but that's the case now.  If there WERE conflicts...  well,
he'd have had to deal with them in svn too.  Commiting takes a few
seconds longer, on waiting for update, but the dev also has a chance
to eyeball the list of changed files and have a offhand guess as to
whether it needs a closer look before commit.


-- 
Matthew Fuller     (MF4839)   |  fullermd at over-yonder.net
Systems/Network Administrator |  http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/
           On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.