views:

86

answers:

2

I am new to SVN and I've poked around looking for an answer on this but I haven't found it yet so here goes:

Using TortoiseSVN, I bring up the REPO browser and navigate to the root of the repository where I can view all the projects.

Is there any way to navigate to a given project and then inquire whether there exists any working copy somewhere for that project?

Properties does not seem to reveal this info.

I know I can check out to a new working copy location but the question is: how can I find out if the project is already checked out (i.e. to someone's working copy location)?

Thanks.

EDIT-clarify:

In short, is there any software (Subversion command, TortoiseSVN, etc.) that can examine a project in the repository to see whether there are any "working copy" folders associated with that project. If any working copy folder(s) exist, then one might be able to determine if there are any uncommitted changes in the working copy (before deciding to checkout the project somewhere else). That is, if programmer X is fired there may be work that was in progress somewhere on X's workstation. All the manager knows is that the repository contains a version of the project X was working on at the time X was laid off. Manager would like to assign the project to programmer Y.

+2  A: 

Subversion does not track information like this - checking out is a purely read only operation. It is however safe to check out a project as many times as you like, all you stand to lose is any uncommitted modifications.

The only solution I can think of would involve subversion hooks - you could add a post commit hook to check if modified working copy files were still in existence and record this somehow. This however would not cover you if someone modified files but never actually committed, or made major modifications to a project and left without committing even a single file. But depending upon your needs, it may be better than nothing

timmow
@timmow - is it possible in some other way ? (please see my EDIT attempting to clarify above).
John Galt
+2  A: 
Michael Hackner
Thank you for the clarification.
John Galt