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

RE: [PATCH] Issue 898 atomic rename, implement svn_fs_rename

From: <rassilon_at_lyra.org>
Date: 2003-01-23 00:23:11 CET

 From: Philip Martin [mailto:philip@codematters.co.uk]
 Branko ─îibej brane@xbc.nu writes:
  In particular, is it correct to record an add and a delete in the
  changes table?
  Ah, yes, that. I've been wondering about that myself, and it seems
  wrong to record an add and delete if we're not, in fact,
 doing that.
  I'd rather introduce rename-source and rename-target records; the
  -source should somehow contain the target path, and the
 -target should
  contain the source path, so that we can follow the rename in both
 Ahh, we do need to store a rename flag after all :) So
 where would the extra path go? In a new renames table? In
 the existing changes table?

Before you figure exactly what data you want to store where be sure to
check out the diff between the #1003 branch and the trunk for the
libsvn_fs/structure file. It will show you the schema changes between
the two branches.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 14 02:07:30 2006

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.