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

Re: text-base penalty: A proposed solution

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_newton.ch.collab.net>
Date: 2002-12-20 16:15:35 CET

brane@xbc.nu writes:
> *sigh*
>
> Repeat after me: The working file and text base can be different even if you
> didn't edit the working file.

Now, if you're going to sigh, then explain how they can differ :-).
(Or has that explanation already gone by in this thread? I haven't
been reading it carefully.)

Bob, et al: the text-base is stored with keywords unexpanded and EOLs
untranslated. The working file has them expanded/translated, however.

(Not that this is a showstopper, since we routinely translate
working-style to text-base-style, and could do so in this situation
too.)

I'm not advocating any code to make text-bases optional, however as
I'm fairly sure such a change would be much too complex to go in
before 1.0. I'd be happy, but *extremely* surprised, to see a patch
or detailed implementation spec that contradicted this.

-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Dec 20 16:56:59 2002

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.