Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 6:21 AM, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
>> ...
>> Can we put new stuff into libsvn_wc2 then?
>
> I thought about this, but decided that would be seriously painful.
>
> Given our versioning guidelines, we have to support the WC API
> *forever* in the 1.x series of releases. That means we'd have to
> support wc1 forever. All that software out there using wc1 would have
> to continue to function.
>
> I'd much prefer to get rid of the wc1 code entirely.
I think a number of us feel the same way, but while were at it, why don't we get
rid of the clunky API[1]? We can continue to ship wc1 in parallel to wc-ng, but
officially deprecate it and promise never to update or support it. If we really
wanted to physically remove the wc1 code, we could reimplement wc1 as a thin
wrapper around wc-ng. We wouldn't be breaking any compatibility guidelines
*and* we'd get to remove API cruft.
Maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill here, but those are my thoughts.
-Hyrum
[1] svn_wc_add3() comes to mind. See this comment in libsvn_client/copy.c:
/* Rewrite URLs recursively, remove wcprops, and mark everything
as 'copied' -- assuming that the src and dst are from the
same repository. (It's kind of weird that svn_wc_add() is the
way to do this; see its doc for more about the controversy.) */
Received on 2008-08-18 16:36:01 CEST