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

Re: svn_client_patch()

From: SteveKing <steveking_at_gmx.ch>
Date: 2003-04-06 16:29:40 CEST

> This all feels pretty arbitrary to me. Cmpilato wants to add property
> support to 'svn patch'. SteveKing wants to add log message support.
> But the *ultimate* goal is a patch format that does much more than
> that -- as Sander says: understands add, rm, copy, move.
> So where do you draw the line when defining this new patch format? Do
> you implement 'svn patch' with just one of these features? Two of
> them?
> I'm asking a sort of meta-question here: is this one of those
> situations where the new patch format is just going to sort of
> 'evolve' by feature creep, or are people actually going to sit down
> and design the format first?

After reading all the suggestions for the new patch format I'd
like to add another one: what if the patch format includes
really everything mentioned above, wouldn't that be like
local commits? I mean commits doing locally until a connection
to the server is available and then do the actual commits.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Apr 6 16:31:26 2003

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.