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

Re: some APR brokenness, I think

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_galois.collab.net>
Date: 2000-10-18 00:49:14 CEST

Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> writes:
> Next milestone? Did M1 become official? I thought there were some FS issues
> that held us back.

Well, there were some wc issues, that's for sure, such as the alloc
bug that Greg H nailed. :-)

M1 got re-scheduled to this Friday, Oct 20th. I think we're doing
okay for that, since we were mostly there already anyway. You should
be able to hook up the networking code without disturbing or being
disturbed by what's gone on elsewhere.

> No matter... networking is on my list, and I'll just code until its done :-)
> Also, Joe will contribute and/or keep me honest. I'm prepping mod_dav today,
> but will be returning to some SVN coding. The network troubles that I had
> last week have calmed down (albeit a slow link, but stable now), so I can
> actually get stuff done.

Glad to hear it.

> [ and an interesting note: mod_dav_svn actually loads and does something
> as of last week... ]

:-)

> What's our due date? Or is at all in my lap? (urk!)

How long do you think we need to hook up both client side and server
side (i.e., actually start using Apache)?

I'm trying to come up with a sequence of milestones, and estimate
dates for them right now. Will get back to you on that. But rest
assured that making m1 functionality happen over the wire is
definitely the next milestone.

If you think that will take longer than three weeks (of work, I mean,
starting after you get back), then I'll have to reconsider some
scheduling stuff. I'm guessing 3 weeks max, though, is that
reasonable? (But please don't be afraid to send me bad news on a
public list. :-) )

> libsvn_ra_local
>
> Establishing the formal RA interface would be a Good Thing (I can code
> against what is built for _local and/or tweak as network-specific things
> arise), and creating a proper layer between the front and back ends (linked
> via _local) would also be a win.
>
> In any case... how would you like to proceed, O Great Project Leader? I *am*
> still here for a few days. [I'll add stuff to TASKS/STACK as a starter]

Far be it from me to impose order on this herd of cats. :-)

But since you ask...

As I understand it, the whole point is that libsvn_ra_dav and
libsvn_ra_local provide different implementations of the same
interface (for those who are curious about the past discussion, the
thread was "Subject: ra library -- philosophy").

Now, what's in svn_ra.h might not be that interface yet (you mentioned
that you threw it together quickly, although actually it looks pretty
good to me). But anyway, as long as we make sure that interface is
not network-specific, implementing libsvn_ra_local is a task for the
future -- just a matter of providing alternative functionality behind
that interface.

So I don't think we should spend time on libsvn_ra_local right now.
Being truly networked, with Apache and the whole nine yards, is a
higher priority, because that's what we need to replace CVS. The
network code path is the one we must Get Right from the beginning.
Let's concentrate on that.

It will be a fine day when we stop swapping these XML files back and
forth and are actually sending DAV protocol over the wire. :-)

So tasks are:

  - make sure you like the interface in svn_ra.h
  - make sure libsvn_ra_dav provides it

Does that sound like a good place to start?,
-K
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:11 2006

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