dglasser_at_gmail.com wrote on 02/21/2008 02:56:01 PM:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 3:50 PM, <kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com> wrote:
> > dglasser_at_gmail.com wrote on 02/21/2008 02:39:49 PM:
> >
> > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 2:52 PM, <kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com>
wrote:
> > > > I just dug into the code and noticed this. However, my thoughts
if
> > > > propset/propdel
> > > > would assume HEAD as the baserev:
> > > >
> > > > 1) For propdel 2 things could have happened:
> > > > a) Some other user just deleted it. So what, you were trying
to
> > delete
> > > > it too!
> > > > b) Some other user modified it. So what, you were trying to
delete
> > it,
> > > > so
> > > > do you really care? In any case, the whole history of the
> > changes
> > > > are
> > > > captured as revisions.
> > >
> > > Sure you might care. You might be deleting all 'foo' properties
with
> > > value X; you wouldn't want to delete it if it changed to Y.
> >
> > Again, the whole history is saved, nothing is lost.
> >
> >
> > > > 2) For propset 1 thing could have happened:
> > > > a) Some other user just created it. So you get an error
stating it
> > > > already
> > > > exists and you will need to use propedit instead.
> > >
> > > Uh, or the other user changed it.
> > >
> > > Say, it's "svn:ignore", and both of you are trying to add a line.
> >
> > We are talking about propset and propadd, not propedit, which as you
> > pointed
> > out is already saving and using a baserev...
> >
> >
> > > > Are any of these "bad"? 1b is the worst, but doesn't seem like
> > unexpected
> > > > behavior.
> > > >
> > > > I suppose you could argue that a long time could have passed
since
> > the
> > > > original user manually looked at the properties so 1 and or 2
could
> > > > have occurred multiple times. Still, the whole history of
changes
> > > > is available, so nothing is lost...
> > > >
> > > > Is this really different than adding/deleting file contents
directly
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > repository using URLs?
> > >
> > > You're right! It's no different than that! Which is why we don't
> > > support that in the svn command-line client either!
> >
> > Hmmm.... What about:
> >
> > svn import my_file.txt http://my_server/my_repo/my_path/my_file.txt
> > svn delete http://my_server/my_repo/my_path/my_file.txt
>
> Er, sorry, I did misread.
>
> The fundamental difference is that there's no concept of deltas (in
> the RA protocol, etc) for properties in Subversion. Thus no
> difference between "change property" and "set property". "svn import"
> can only add files, not edit them... but the change_node_prop call
> looks the same for both.
I guess I'm most interested in the user interface, not the low level
interface. I've always assumed you couldn't 'svn propset' on
an existing property, you had to 'svn propedit'. Therefore the
property interface should be no different than the file contents
interface (to the end user).
I've found it quite annoying that you need the file contents
in a working copy just to modify file properties. We have some
2G+ files and it is really annoying to have to check them out
just to add svn:needs-lock...
Kevin R.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-02-21 22:06:05 CET