On Sun, 2003-12-28 at 12:34, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> > I'd like to document that reports have to be sent in depth-first
> > order, beginning with a specified rev for the root path, first because
> > that's how we do it now, and second because it gives us the option of
> > storing the report into a temporary file and then processing the
> > temporary file in a streamy fashion.
> >
> > Objections?
>
> Certainly none for trunk. And I assume you'll add it to the 1.0 list?
It would be an incompatible API and ABI change to document this on the
trunk and not on the 1.0 branch, so I will file an issue and add it to
the 1.0 list without committing it to the trunk.
I will also document the following bizarre and gross report behavior I
discovered just now: if you do an "svn update A/B" and there is a
deleted entry for A/B, the adm crawler will report:
set_path("", rev-of-anchor)
delete_path("")
(The rev in the initial set_path call is usually the rev of the target,
but in this case there is no such rev, so it falls back to the rev of
the anchor.)
If I had noticed this six months ago, I would have engineered a protocol
change to clean it up by having the wc report only delete_path(""), but
I think it's much too late for that now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Dec 28 20:05:32 2003