[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: <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: 2003-04-18 06:02:39 CEST

Tom Lord <lord@emf.net> writes:

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

No sweat.

> > 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".

I did actually gather as much from the last two paragraphs of your
mail. Unfortunately, I lacked the context to pass judgment on the
accuracy of the claim. I'll leave that for other brains to
ponder. :-)

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Apr 18 06:05:49 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.