Branko =?ISO-8859-2?Q?=C8ibej?= <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
> Branko �ibej wrote:
>
> > Tell you what, I'll fix this along with the "structure" and "skel.h"
> > changes I proposed, then I'll paste the whole thing as an appendix
> > into "structure", O.K.? I'm sure it'll help other readers understand
> > what's going on.
>
> I just commited a change to the "structure" file, renaming ENTRY to
> ENTRY-NAME in the Clones section, and adding the appendix. Please yell
> if I goofed.
>
> Now I have two more questions, regarding the filesystem revisions table.
>
> 1) Why is the revision skel ("revision" ID PROPLIST), instead of just
> (ID PROPLIST)? Will there be other kinds of records in the "revisions"
> table?
Not other kinds of records, but if we wanted to adjust the format of
the revision skel, we could identify new-format revisions with
("revision-2" THING ...). The idea is that this data is going to live
a long time, so there should be room for version tags on most data.
I agree this is a somewhat weak justification. One can always stick
additional data on the end of the list. It's just a pattern that's
useful elsewhere, and applied here out of habit.
> 2) The table description says:
>
> Since Berkeley DB record numbers start with 1, whereas Subversion
> filesystem revision numbers start at zero, revision V is stored as
> record number V-1 in the `revisions' table.
>
>
> Surely that can't be right? If the number ranges are correct, then the
> mapping should be "filesystem revision V -> record number V+1".
You're right, the text should be changed as you suggest.
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:15 2006