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

RE: Fixing issue #842

From: Bill Tutt <rassilon_at_lyra.org>
Date: 2002-08-05 19:29:46 CEST

> From: cmpilato@collab.net [mailto:cmpilato@collab.net]
> "Bill Tutt" <rassilon@lyra.org> writes:
> > Good point. This new CopyID is a lazily instantiated copy. We knew
> > user meant to have us do this earlier, but since Subversion is so
> > it finally got around to doing it now.
> Right.
> > * What should the new CopyID's source information be when A2/foo2
> > modified?
> >
> > This should be A/foo2 and the TxnID of the A/foo -> A/foo2 copy
> > operation.
> Hm... Determining that PATH is gonna be a booger. I mean, in general
> the question "Given a node-revision-id, find its path" can be real
> pain. I can't help but wonder if we actually *need* to try to
> determine the source path though. Let me put it another way -- at the
> time we make this special copy happen, I don't believe we have any
> more knowledge than we would have were to try to derive the source
> path well into the future. If we don't need the path, and we want a
> way to denote "special" copies ... perhaps the absence of
> source_path/txn_id can serve as such indication. In fact, the no-op
> copy '0' has no path and no txn_id ... so there is a little bit of a
> precedent. :-)

Heh. Nice try, I'm not buying it. :)

Given the destination NodeID and TxnID of the A/foo2 copy which we
already have, it's should be easy to scan the change information for
that TxnID and NodeID and obtain our path as our result.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Aug 5 19:34:41 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.