Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:
> I'll work on filing issues for some of this stuff in a bit.
Thanks.
> > I recall some part of the RA interface being very relaxed about empty
> > strings versus NULL points. Something dealing with the authors and
> > dates and stuff. I certainly have no problem tightening up stuff
> > like that.
>
> Right now, we don't generally assume that a revision has an author or
> date; in practice, revision 0 doesn't have them any all other revisions
> do. We might be able to clean this situation up by doing something
> intelligent with revision 0 and treating it as a database corruption
> error if any other revision doesn't have commit info.
We should certainly make the interfaces consistent (i.e., always use
NULL, not "", to mean the property isn't present). But I don't think
we should treat it as corruption if a revision doesn't have commit
info. The revision tree is still good, and the association of an
author, or whatever, with a change is not something the filesystem
should enforce. One can imagine setups where it wouldn't be
meaningful, and therefore would just be annoying bureaucracy for the
repository admin.
-K
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Nov 4 19:42:54 2002