Karl Fogel wrote:
> My main thought right now is, can you attach your vision of grandeur
> to the issue? :-)
Just did.
> The proposal looks good; we still need to know the user interface,
> though. For implementation I prefer your "straightforward"
> approach, as a lot of factoring will get done naturally that way
> anyway.
Yes, further thought has provoked me to go down that line as well -
but that will mean lots of nasty questions about how translations
should happen in working copies to the list :-)
> I don't mean to be discouraging, but there are just too many other
> hot issues right now, so we can't spend much time on special files
> support (at least I can't, and the same is probably true for many
> other developers). It will be a great feature when we have it, but
> since the latest proposal wonderfully does not require any libsvn_wc
> redesign, that means we don't have to worry about painting ourselves
> into a corner if we wait.
>
> If you have usage scenarios and/or a working patch, there's no
> reason they can't be committed when ready. I'm just pointing out
> that you're in the driver's seat if you want this to happen before
> 1.0 :-).
Yes, I'm perfectly aware of this. It's just that I consider special
file storage as an important feature of subversion - even for
1.0. Perhaps not quite the kind to hold up 1.0 for, but important
still. So yes, I'm quite fine to be in the driver's seat - that's why
I started thinking about this.
Though, I personally consider ra_pipe a requirement for a 1.0 release
- so I'll prioritize it over all other projects in Subversion if
there's a way to help with it's development.
-- Naked
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Oct 29 18:42:46 2002