> Issue #1648 is about anticipating a possible future UI, the --depth
> option, by making some internal function interfaces take a tri-state
> 'depth' enum instead of a bi-state 'recurse' boolean.
What makes these functions "internal?" We would need to change
libsvn_client as well as libsvn_ra, and neither of those is
"internal."
> First, we don't know for sure how the --depth option is going to
> work, or that we're definitely going to do it at all. Yes, we've
> discussed it, but the enhancement has not been spec'd out to the
> degree it would be if we were implementing it right now. It feels
> wrong to make an anticipatory internal API adjustment for a feature
> that isn't even completely designed yet.
If we're not going to implement such a feature at all, then sure,
let's punt. If there are any ardent supports of --depth, they should
speak up as soon as possible.
On the other hand, if we do anticipate adding this feature, I think
replacing the boolean with an enum is pretty trivial, and pretty
obviously a key step in the right direction. It could be a
two-element enum for now, so we wouldn't be specifying any
unimplemented behavior.
> Second, even if the --depth option does get implemented in the near
> future, and looks exactly as we expect it to, there are strategies
> for dealing with the compatibility issues then. We can keep the
> current function names as wrappers around new functions that end in
> "_depth" or whatever, officially deprecate the old ones, and then in
> a future API-changing release, make the final break in the obvious
> way.
We could; it's just really ugly, and we'd have to keep them around
longer than we think.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Dec 20 04:37:22 2003