[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Format bump for 1.8?

From: Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 00:23:08 +0200

On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 25, 2012, at 3:14 PM, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 09:03:47PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>> on the same working copy. E.g. a 1.7 client might run into tree conflicts
>>> which it cannot understand because a 1.8 client flagged a conflict involving
>>> a move. I believe we should bump to avoid such problems.
>>
>> FYI, here is what this looks like:
>>
>> With trunk:
>>
>> $ svn status
>> !     C alpha
>>>  local moved away and edited, incoming delete upon update
>> A  +    alpha2
>> Summary of conflicts:
>>  Tree conflicts: 1
>>
>> With 1.7.x:
>>
>> $ svn status
>> subversion/svn/status-cmd.c:344: (apr_err=155016)
>> subversion/svn/util.c:981: (apr_err=155016)
>> subversion/libsvn_client/status.c:490: (apr_err=155016)
>> subversion/libsvn_wc/status.c:2421: (apr_err=155016)
>> subversion/libsvn_wc/status.c:2421: (apr_err=155016)
>> subversion/libsvn_wc/status.c:1200: (apr_err=155016)
>> subversion/svn/status.c:210: (apr_err=155016)
>> subversion/svn/status.c:210: (apr_err=155016)
>> subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c:5814: (apr_err=155016)
>> subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c:5814: (apr_err=155016)
>> subversion/libsvn_wc/tree_conflicts.c:249: (apr_err=155016)
>> subversion/libsvn_wc/tree_conflicts.c:130: (apr_err=155016)
>> svn: E155016: Unknown enumeration value in tree conflict description
>>
>> I don't see a way to avoid this problem for 1.7 clients, apart from either
>> reverting the tree conflict description changes or bumping the format.
>
> What about the move feature? What happens when 1.7 client commits a move or partial move that was made with 1.8?

Agreed, that was a bad idea.

But "the other way around", where a 1.8 client carries around 1.7
compatibility code to keep working with 1.7-format working copies
(upgrade being optional (to enable local-move-tracking for instance))
is still a sensible idea I think. Although it would definitely be a
lot of work, there is no argument there ...

-- 
Johan
Received on 2012-06-26 00:23:59 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.