The &#39;conflicts&#39; version will use the specified copy for the conflicts only, letting the normal merge work for any other changes.

Using the &#39;full&#39; version will use the entire file as specified, disregarding the results of the merge.

http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.8/svn.tour.cycle.html#svn.tour.cycle.resolve

mine-conflict will use your code in every conflict situation, but still do regular merging in all other situations.

mine-full will use your entire file, throwing away all changes in theirs.

Rails has a `has_one :through` association that helps set up a one-to-one association with a third model by going through a second model. What is the real use of that besides making a shortcut association, that would otherwise be an extra step away.

Taking this example from the Rails [guide][1]:

    class Supplier &lt; ActiveRecord::Base
      has_one :account
      has_one :account_history, :through =&gt; :account
    end
    
    class Account &lt; ActiveRecord::Base
      belongs_to :supplier
      has_one :account_history
    end
    
    class AccountHistory &lt; ActiveRecord::Base
      belongs_to :account
    end

might allow us to do something like:

    supplier.account_history

which would otherwise be reached as:

    supplier.account.history

If it&#39;s only for simpler access then technically there could be a one-to-one association that connects a model with some nth model going through n-1 models for easier access. Is there anything else to it that I am missing besides the shortcut? 

  [1]: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/association_basics.html

Rails has_one :through association

I need to implement a Geo proximity search in my application but I&#39;m very confused regarding the correct formula to use. After some searches in the Web and in StackOverflow I found that the solutions are:

 1. Use the **Haversine Formula**
 2. &lt;s&gt;Use the **Great-Circle Distance Formula**&lt;/s&gt;
 3. Use a **Spatial Search Engine** in the Database

Option #3 is really not an option for me ATM. Now I&#39;m a little confused since I always though that the [Great-Circle Distance Formula][1] and [Haversine Formula][2] were **synonymous** but apparently I was wrong?

[![Haversine Formula][3]][3]
&lt;!-- source: http://i46.tinypic.com/30shbn6.png --&gt;

The above screen shot was taken from the awesome **[Geo (proximity) Search with MySQL][4]** paper, and uses the following functions:

    ASIN, SQRT, POWER, SIN, PI, COS

I&#39;ve also seen variations from the **&lt;s&gt;same formula&lt;/s&gt; ([Spherical Law of Cosines][5])**, like this one:

    (3956 * ACOS(COS(RADIANS(o_lat)) * COS(RADIANS(d_lat)) * COS(RADIANS(d_lon) - RADIANS(o_lon)) + SIN(RADIANS(o_lat)) * SIN(RADIANS(d_lat))))

That uses the following functions:

    ACOS, COS, RADIANS, SIN

I am not a math expert, but are these formulas the same? I&#39;ve come across some **more variations, and formulas** (such as the **[Spherical Law of Cosines][6]** and the **[Vincenty&#39;s][7] [formulae][8]** - which seems to be the most accurate) and that makes me even more confused...

I need to choose a good general purpose formula to implement in PHP / MySQL. Can anyone explain me the differences between the formulas I mentioned above?

 - **Which one is the fastest to compute?**
 - **Which one provides the most accurate results?**
 - **Which one is the best in terms of speed / accuracy of results?**

I appreciate your insight on these questions.

----------

Based on [theonlytheory][9] answer I tested the following Great-Circle Distance Formulas:

 - Vincenty Formula
 - Haversine Formula
 - Spherical Law of Cosines

The **Vincenty Formula** is dead slow, however **it&#39;s pretty accurate (down to 0.5 mm)**.

The **Haversine Formula** is way faster than the Vincenty Formula, I was able to run 1 million calculations in about 6 seconds which is pretty much acceptable for my needs.

The **Spherical Law of Cosines Formula** revealed to be **almost twice as fast** as the Haversine Formula, and **the precision difference is neglectfulness** for most usage cases.

----------

Here are some test locations:

 - **Google HQ** (`37.422045`, `-122.084347`)
 - **San Francisco, CA** (`37.77493`, `-122.419416`)
 - **Eiffel Tower, France** (`48.8582`, `2.294407`)
 - **Opera House, Sydney** (`-33.856553`, `151.214696`)

----------

**Google HQ - San Francisco, CA:**

 - Vincenty Formula: `49 087.066 meters`
 - Haversine Formula: `49 103.006 meters`
 - Spherical Law of Cosines: `49 103.006 meters`

----------

**Google HQ - Eiffel Tower, France:**

 - Vincenty Formula: `8 989 724.399 meters`
 - Haversine Formula: `8 967 042.917 meters`
 - Spherical Law of Cosines: `8 967 042.917 meters`

----------

**Google HQ - Opera House, Sydney:**

 - Vincenty Formula: `11 939 773.640 meters`
 - Haversine Formula: `11 952 717.240 meters`
 - Spherical Law of Cosines: `11 952 717.240 meters`

----------

As you can see there is **no noticeable difference** between the Haversine Formula and the Spherical Law of Cosines, however both have **distance offsets as high as 22 kilometers** compared to the Vincenty Formula because it uses an ellipsoidal approximation of the earth instead of a spherical one.

  [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great-circle_distance
  [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haversine_formula
  [3]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/Pqy1D.png
  [4]: http://www.arubin.org/files/geo_search.pdf
  [5]: http://www.thismuchiknow.co.uk/?p=71
  [6]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_law_of_cosines
  [7]: http://www.movable-type.co.uk/scripts/latlong-vincenty.html
  [8]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincenty%27s_formulae
  [9]: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2096385/formulas-to-calculate-geo-proximity/2097779#2097779

Formulas to Calculate Geo Proximity

According to the docs:
 
&gt; (mc) mine-conflict    - accept my
&gt; version for all conflicts (same)  
&gt; (tc) theirs-conflict  - accept their
&gt; version for all conflicts (same)
&gt; 
&gt;  (mf) mine-full        - accept my
&gt; version of entire file (even
&gt; non-conflicts)  
&gt; (tf) theirs-full - accept their version of entire file (same)

I don&#39;t understand the difference between the *-conflict and *-full commands.  It seems like it would get you the same results.


----------


More:
See [this thread][1] for a more detailed response to this question.


  [1]: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2121158/a-example-of-a-change-that-is-not-a-conflict

Purpose of the mine-full and theirs-full commands

According to the docs:
> (mc) mine-conflict - accept my
> version for all conflicts (same) 
> (tc) theirs-conflict - accept their
> version for all conflicts (same)
>
> (mf) mine-full - accept my
> version of entire file (even
> non-conflicts) 
> (tf) theirs-full - accept their version of entire file (same)
I don't understand the difference between the *-conflict and *-full commands. It seems like it would get you the same results.
<hr>
More:
See <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2121158/a-example-of-a-change-that-is-not-a-conflict" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">this thread</a> for a more detailed response to this question.

I am using an ORM which generates large amounts of files from a CLI.  Is there an easy way to run the `svn add` on all files within a directory which appear as `?` when I run `svn status`?

**Edit**  These files exist in a directory tree so adding `*` for one directory will not work.

How do I add all new files to SVN

I&#39;m using TortoiseSVN. I just made quite a few changes to my working copy and now I went to do a commit some of the files went through but at one file named Search.aspx.cs it says

    Commit failed (details follow):
    Can&#39;t open file 
    &#39;C:\-----\trunk\.svn\text-base\Search.aspx.cs.svn-base&#39;: 
    The system cannot find the file specified.

I have tried doing a SVN update and SVN cleanup and nothing is restoring this file. I can&#39;t even create a diff because it gives a similar error about missing files. How do I fix this? What did I do to cause it? 

Can&#39;t open .svn/text-base/file.svn-base?

There are four common protocols for network access of SVN.

    svn://repos
    svn+ssh://repos
    https://repos
    http://repos

The Wikipedia page doesn&#39;t say much about the differences of the four different protocols. I&#39;ve always preferred `svn://`, because it is the easiest to set up, but what is the difference and which one is &quot;better&quot;?


Which protocol? svn:// or http(s)://?

I&#39;ve got a SVN Repository that has moved to a new address/path. However, I&#39;ve got a working copy with uncommitted source code still pointing to the old (now invalid) repository path. How do you change a working copy to point at a new repository?

SVN - Change working copy to point at new svn path

I want to be sure that if I commit something in Subversion from one machine, and I checkout on another, I will get the same value for datetime and timestamp.

Currently, I observed that the datetime of file&#39;s modification is from the moment when I did the synchronisation instead of the original value.

For me, it doesn&#39;t make any sense to know when the files were synchronised - I just want to see the last commit time.

This issue is not timezone related.

Content Type	Original Author	Original Content on Stackoverflow
Question	Hua-Ying	View Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - Svn	rjohnston	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - Svn	digitaljoel	View Answer on Stackoverflow

Purpose of the mine-full and theirs-full commands

Svn Problem Overview

Svn Solutions

Solution 1 - Svn

Solution 2 - Svn

Formulas to Calculate Geo Proximity

Rails has_one :through association

Attributions