Julian Foad wrote:
> A "quick win" enhancement?
>
>
> REQUIREMENT
>
> A user or admin at SubConf told me he often wanted to know when a branch
> had been created. We have:
>
> svn log -q --stop-on-copy
>
> which gives the correct answer, but on a long-lived branch this can take
> a long time - minutes - to complete, which is frustrating and makes the
> question practically unavailable to most scripts. It is with heavy use
> of branching that this question becomes commonly asked.
>
> I have to admit I don't know this particular user's use case - context -
> of wanting to know the branch point. I do know there are several things
> it is helpful for.
>
>
> ANALYSIS
>
> If Subversion had a primary concept of "a branch", we would want to know
> when "this branch" was created:
>
> (1) In which revision was the branch 'B' created?
>
> As Subversion's concept of a branch is a node that has been copied, we
> can ask the question as:
>
> (2) In which revision was the branch root directory 'B' most recently
> created by copying?
>
> When we support True Renames, we will want to ignore any moves or
> renames of the branch since it was created. Until then, we could
> implement this question instead:
>
> (3) In which revision did this node's line of history last come to its
> current (repository) path? In other words, in which revision was this
> node most recently added or copied (to here) or moved (to here)?
>
> Now that we are thinking about a question that applies to any node, not
> necessarily a branch, we might sometimes want to ask a variant of that
> question. Imagine a file BAR that has been copied from file FOO at some
> time, but we don't know whether that was before or after the branch B
> was created. We could ask:
>
> (4) In which revision was B/BAR most recently added or copied (to
> here) or moved (to here), ignoring any branching (copying) of its parent
> directories?
>
> But I think question (4) fits less well with Subversion's concepts than
> (3).
>
>
> UI DESIGN (COMMAND-LINE)
>
> Eventually we might have a set of branching commands, and then the
> branch-aware version of this query should fit in with them. Until then,
> I don't want to see a new subcommand like
>
> svn in-which-revision-was-this-branch-created
>
> but we need to look for a UI space for this (and several other queries
> that 'svn' ought to support).
>
> It feels to me that the query version (3) fits well in the "svn info"
> output. In the example below (which is on a file rather than a branch),
> the last line of "svn info" output is new:
>
> [[[
> $ svn log -vq --stop-on-copy ~/public_html/upload.sh
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r5 | julianfoad | 2009-06-26 17:28:30 +0100 (Fri, 26 Jun 2009)
> Changed paths:
> D /public_html/rsync-this.sh
> A /public_html/upload.sh (from /public_html/rsync-this.sh:2)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> $ svn info ~/public_html/upload.sh
> Path: /home/julianfoad/public_html/upload.sh
> Name: upload.sh
> URL: file:///home/julianfoad/vcs/green/public_html/upload.sh
> Repository Root: file:///home/julianfoad/vcs/green
> Repository UUID: 0e873508-286d-0410-b431-0fc449f9f81d
> Revision: 5
> Node Kind: file
> Schedule: normal
> Last Changed Author: julianfoad
> Last Changed Rev: 5
> Last Changed Date: 2009-06-26 17:28:30 +0100 (Fri, 26 Jun 2009)
> Text Last Updated: 2009-06-25 11:45:23 +0100 (Thu, 25 Jun 2009)
> Checksum: 55d960df51a56fd911784159c7657559
> At This Repos Path Since Revision: 5
> ]]]
>
> or "Came Here In Revision: 5"?
>
> Thoughts?
>
When I started reading your mail, extending "svn info" immediately came
to mind. But maybe writing this info by default is not a good idea; it
might cause problems for wrapper scripts and such. But "svn info
--branch" would be nice; you could add things like "Root revision" or
Branch revision", and "Branched from", etc.
An API that lets one easily retreive such information will be a boon to
GUI clients that like to paint pretty pictures of trees and branches.
-- Brane
> - Julian
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2413786
>
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2413830
Received on 2009-11-02 16:08:46 CET