On Apr 24, 2012 10:08 AM, "Daniel Shahaf" <danielsh_at_elego.de> wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote on Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 22:47:43 -0400:
> > On Apr 23, 2012 7:20 PM, "Hyrum K Wright" <hyrum.wright_at_wandisco.com>
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 16:21, Hyrum K Wright <
> > wrote:
> > > >> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com>
> > > >>...
> > > >>> Alright. It sounds like svn_ra.h has two purposes: stuff for
> > libsvn_client,
> > > >>> and stuff for all RA layers to use internally. Ugh.
> > > >>
> > > >> But the capability strings are part of the public API.
> > > >
> > > > Says who? Not server Ev2 support. The RA layer can isolate that, so
> > > > should not be "part of the public API".
> > > >
> > > > Mergeinfo support? Sure. But Ev2? Nah.
> > >
> > > The entire RA interface is part of the public API. The wire protocols
> > > are the public interface to the server, particularly for those who
> > > want to write their own clients and server. These strings are part of
> > > that definition.
> > Ah. There we go. That clinches it.
> > It's too bad we don't have svn_wire.h. Right now, svn_ra serves both
> > purposes, so yah... I guess it makes sense to leave it there, unless
> > like to start migrating appropriate pieces to a new header. Thoughts?
> Haven't followed the thread, but we generally declared only the C API to
> be public, while the wire API was considered "internal". (i.e., we'll
> have to make it compatible to respect our 1.x-client/1.y-server promise,
> but we don't officially support people writing their own wire clients,
> etc, not through our libraries)
Hmm. True. .../include/private/svn_wire.h then.
Received on 2012-04-24 18:20:58 CEST