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

Re: wcprops

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_newton.ch.collab.net>
Date: 2002-05-20 22:34:04 CEST

Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> writes:
> > Back to square 1 again. Essentially what Karl suggested: tweak the
> > editor docstring promise, so that the base-revision sanity check is
> > optional. Grrrrrr.
> Nope nope... much simpler. Just tweak the return paths.
> The base-revision should remain a strong condition (and/or docs clarified)
> regardless of this change, but editor drives are overkill here.

I'd like to clarify: I wasn't suggesting that using the editor was the
cleanest solution, merely that the vague conditions imposed on the
base_revision argument shouldn't stand in the way. If using editor is
undesirable for other reasons, then that's different.

(I don't think base_revision should be a strong requirement anyway,
though. If you pass SVN_INVALID_REVNUM, it should just ignore the


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon May 20 22:36:13 2002

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.