Re: Auditing Design - v1

On 24/02/2007 3.54, Daniel Rall wrote:

>> 'svn blame':
>> Two additional columns for each line, one with the original revision
>> number, and one with the original author of that line. Unlike other
>> commands, we do not need to worry about multiple source revisions,
>> because each line can have at most one author.
>
> Yup, but determine which of a merge's source revisions changed a line
> is going to be tricky.

But if you don't do this, anything else in this auditing design seems rather
useless to me. If you just "go back" through single-revision merges, you're
not helping *that* much. A merge revision with a commit log quoting the single
revision that is being merged (like when you do it with svnmerge.py) is a
reasonable thing to use. Even without auditing, you need a single svn log to
find out the infos you might need.

On the other hand, auditing through a merge of many revisions is something
which is very hard to do manually. At minimum, you have to find out the
original branch URL, and the magic combination of peg-revs/operative-revs
which will allow you to blame/cat/whatever the file in that branch at the
point of merge.

-- 
Giovanni Bajo
Develer S.r.l.
http://www.develer.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org