Tom Lord wrote:
> A quick list of problems with traditional patches (i.e. diff(1) output)
> * metadata (properties)
> * log messages
> * binary files
> * deletion of directories
> * addition of empty files
> * svn cp
>
> arch takes care of all of those for you plus much, much more. It has
> been proposed and rejected to integrate these features of arch with
> svn anytime soon.
"Proposed" is a vague word that ranges from "here's a patch to add this
feature" to "I have this feature in arch. You don't have it in
Subversion. You should add it in a similar way to how I did it in arch"
and everything in between.
Likewise, "rejected" is vague. It could mean anything from "we don't
feel that feature is valuable and bloats the code unnecessarily" to
"we'd like to see that but can't expend effort on it".
I don't remember anyone arguing that the feature is not valuable, only
that they couldn't take the time to implement it when they want 1.0 out
the door. I don't remember anyone stopping you from working on it.
I'd love to see this feature, but I don't have enough time to spend on
Subversion, enough familiarity with Subversion's innards (partially as a
consequence of the first), or enough willpower to do basically anything
of significance in plain C.
Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Oct 28 00:43:25 2002