On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 11:51:13AM -0600, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
>
> So we'll soon have two Repository Access (RA) implementations: ra_dav
> and ra_local.
>
> The client keeps available RA `plugins' (vtable structures) in a
> private array. When it sees an http:// repository URL, it knows to
> use the ra_dav vtable. When it sees a file:/ repository URL, it knows
> to use the ra_local vtable.
>
> My original idea was that libsvn_client load these RA implementation
> "on demand". But this is stupid, isn't it? I mean, libsvn_ra_dav and
> libsvn_ra_local should just be statically or dynamically linked, don't
> you think? (That is, rather than dealing with portably loading dso's)
> I can't see the advantage of on-demand loading unless we someday have
> 37 RA implementations...
>
> Do people agree?
speaking as someone with only a cursory understanding of the code, it
seems excessively complicated to add support for dynamically loading
these modules when you've only got two, both of which are necessary.
imho, stick to linking them in, and devote the time and effort to other
parts of the project that are more vital to a 1.0 release.
--
garrett rooney my pid is inigo montoya.
rooneg@electricjellyfish.net you kill -9 my parent process.
http://electricjellyfish.net/ prepare to vi.
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:21 2006