On 14.05.2011 14:01, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 04:00, Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl> wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein_at_gmail.com]
>>> Sent: zaterdag 14 mei 2011 7:06
>>> To: dev_at_subversion.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1102912 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion:
>>> include/private/svn_wc_private.h libsvn_client/prop_commands.c
>>> libsvn_wc/externals.c libsvn_wc/wc_db.c tests/libsvn_wc/db-test.c
>>> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 18:23, <rhuijben_at_apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Author: rhuijben
>>>> Date: Fri May 13 22:22:59 2011
>>>> New Revision: 1102912
>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1102912&view=rev
>>>> Make the svn_client_proplist3 funtion capable of reading properties from
>>>> new style file externals.
>>> Huh? I thought file externals had NODES and ACTUAL_NODE rows?
>>> Shouldn't the properties be available there? What are we doing
>>> *special casing* externals like this?
>> See the document you asked me to write: notes/wc-ng/externals
>> They live in NODES now, but not after we bump to format 29. (They can/will
>> probably survive in ACTUAL_NODES as they share the same path anyway)
>> After we bump to format 29 file externals will be "just like normal
>> externals". They won't be part of the parent working copy NODES tree. (And
>> can come from different repositories; can be placed in subdirs; etc. etc.).
>> But of course they will still share the parent wc's db and pristine store as
>> they can't have their own administrative area.
> I just read it, and I think that I disagree with the approach.
> It now seems that we are going to have to special-check *everywhere*
> to see if a node exists as a file external. Every single place we look
> for a node, will now require a check to see if a file external lives
> at that spot.
> Special casing doesn't seem like a good approach.
> Couldn't you have used a new presence value in the database to note
> these? The NODES schema already allows for different repositories
> (repos_id). All the data would live in NODES just like every other
> item. No need to go and look in a different table (which already looks
> much like NODES).
> I'd rather see file externals look more like regular nodes, instead of
> some ephemeral thing.
Couldn't agree more. The direction we should be taking is integrating
/all/ externals into NODES (eventually), not moving them out. This is
going to make all queries into the wc-db even more complex (and slower).
Received on 2011-05-15 03:59:28 CEST