On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 12:12:39PM -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> Jacob Smullyan <smulloni@smullyan.org> writes:
>
> > Subversion's use of WebDAV/DeltaV would seem to be at odds with the
> > idea that the current client library is a black box implementation.
> > Otherwise, why use a standardized protocol? There's no point in
> > learning French if you don't want to speak it with anyone.
>
> Careful... subversion isn't claiming to be the "definitive deltaV
> implementation", either client or server. The deltaV SCM model
> doesn't perfectly match the Subversion or CVS model; Greg Stein has
> therefore been very carefully implementing a specific subset of
> deltaV. In the long run, this subset will grow, and Subversion's
> client and server will become more and more compatible with other
> implementations.
Granted and understood. I'm not claiming that SVN should be or should claim
to be a definitive deltav implementation. However, DeltaV was, as far as I
can tell, more or less designed with the idea that particular servers will
only implement relevant subsets of the spec. A deltaV client library that
supports SVN will have a lot of code in it that should work with other deltav
servers, and thus is probably worth working on.
--
Jacob Smullyan | smulloni@smullyan.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:33 2006