Issue 175 in svnbook: Confusing explanation of vendor branch mgmt.

[svnbook at googlecode.com]

Status: New
Owner: ----
Labels: Type-Enhancement Priority-Medium

New issue 175 by s.v.h.ha... at gmail.com: Confusing explanation of vendor  
branch mgmt.
http://code.google.com/p/svnbook/issues/detail?id=175

The following text in the explanation/example for vendor branches (in chap.  
4) has caused me a
  lot of headache recently:

      <para> After replacing the 1.0 code with 1.1 code, <command>svn
         status</command> will show files with local modifications as
         well as, perhaps, some unversioned files.  If we did what we

While the term "local modifications" is a standardized, unambiguous term in  
all other places (AFAIK),
it can be terribly confusing here: I tend to read it as "*my* modifications  
- not yet checked in from
*my* working dir - intended to incorporate the vendor code into our  
project".

But here, it refers *only* to the modifications in the *vendor* code from  
1.0 to 1.1, i.e. no
modification of mine!

I suggest to use the term "svn status in the <filename>current</filename>  
directory will show files modified by the vendor  from 1.0 to 1.1, as well  
as..." instead.

Sincerely,
Stein Haugan