Branko =?ISO-8859-2?Q?=C8ibej?= <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Branko ďż˝ibej wrote:
> > Tell you what, I'll fix this along with the "structure" and "skel.h"
> > changes I proposed, then I'll paste the whole thing as an appendix
> > into "structure", O.K.? I'm sure it'll help other readers understand
> > what's going on.
> I just commited a change to the "structure" file, renaming ENTRY to
> ENTRY-NAME in the Clones section, and adding the appendix. Please yell
> if I goofed.
> Now I have two more questions, regarding the filesystem revisions table.
> 1) Why is the revision skel ("revision" ID PROPLIST), instead of just
> (ID PROPLIST)? Will there be other kinds of records in the "revisions"
Not other kinds of records, but if we wanted to adjust the format of
the revision skel, we could identify new-format revisions with
("revision-2" THING ...). The idea is that this data is going to live
a long time, so there should be room for version tags on most data.
I agree this is a somewhat weak justification. One can always stick
additional data on the end of the list. It's just a pattern that's
useful elsewhere, and applied here out of habit.
> 2) The table description says:
> Since Berkeley DB record numbers start with 1, whereas Subversion
> filesystem revision numbers start at zero, revision V is stored as
> record number V-1 in the `revisions' table.
> Surely that can't be right? If the number ranges are correct, then the
> mapping should be "filesystem revision V -> record number V+1".
You're right, the text should be changed as you suggest.
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:15 2006