Re: svn commit: r16230 - in branches/wc-replacements/subversion: tests/clients/cmdline
On 9/25/05, Erik Huelsmann <email@example.com> wrote:
> Hi Ivan!
> On 9/23/05, firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Author: zhakov
> > Date: Fri Sep 23 11:19:17 2005
> > New Revision: 16230
> > Modified:
> > branches/wc-replacements/subversion/libsvn_wc/entries.c
> > branches/wc-replacements/subversion/tests/clients/cmdline/copy_tests.py
> > Log:
> > Cleanup meaningless entry fields combinations when it gets modified.
> > This fixes deletion of replaced files.
> > * subversion/libsvn_wc/entries.c
> > (fold_entry): Cleanup meaningless fields combination.
> > * subversion/tests/clients/cmdline/copy_tests.py:
> > (test_list): Remove XFail mark from delete_replaced_file test,
> > because change fixes it.
> We talked about this change last friday on IRC. You asked on dev@ in
> which routine to do the cleanup. Philip Martin responded that
> fold_entry was an odd place to him
Little refinement: Philip Martin said that fold_scheduling is odd for
him, not fold_entry./
> Can anybody come up with arguments why one change or the other is
> better? From what Philip writes, I conclude he feels
> svn_wc__entry_modify is the better place to do the change. I'm
> looking for arguments rather than feelings though.
My arguments that change in fold_entry more simpler and doesn't
depends what is modified in entry.
Received on Sun Sep 25 19:18:11 2005
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev