Niels Reedijk <niels.reedijk@xxxxxxxxx>: > > On Apr 12, 2005 8:53 PM, Mikael Jansson (mailing lists) > <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > > It definitely is superior - but what in the hell do you mean with > > > "working moves"? > > > In Subversion, a move is a combined copy+remove action. > > > > > Out of curiosity, is it -exactly- the same thing? And, in that > > case, is > > the version info kept in the copy? > > It copies the history. But in terms of bandwith and storage room, a > move is not the same as copy+remove. > Yeah, it's a lazy-copy, like in Perforce. ;) The reason I'm asking is because I'm looking into what SVN does better or worse than Perforce, and one of the things I prefer in SVN over Perforce is that Perforce "kind-of" keeps the history in that you have to check branches (Perforce's way of doing renames) manually for history records. Or at least the impression I've got. -- Mikael Jansson http://mikael.jansson.be