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

Re: short question about merge [PROPOSAL] vs. tree-deltas

From: Tom Lord <lord_at_emf.net>
Date: 2003-04-18 06:05:43 CEST


> [refinements to my still-developing grokking of the
> data structures and their future evolution.]

Thank you.

> And ... judging by the size of the rest of your mail, and
> that a quick skim doesn't seem to reveal more questions
> about today's FS, I regret to inform you that I've timed
> out. :-\

Oh well. The upshot is that you can assume as much
rename/copy/add/delete history as you like, with any optimizations to
access to that history you like, and it doesn't matter. Semantically,
that data + noderev history data doesn't add up to enough to do
reasonable tree deltas. Tree deltas reflect the logical roles of
files -- and those ancestry and tree-rearrangement histories don't
reflect the logical roles of files. So you need something new in the
data model -- such as "logical ID cookies".


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Apr 18 05:54:57 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.