Re: Summary: URL rev proposals

cmpilato@collab.net wrote:

>Ah, now some implications are coming to mind. The most obvious is
>that we are robbing Subversion users of the ability to make their own
>top-level directory named 'revs', which they may want to do. But more
>annoyingly, from an implementation standpoint, we introduce a cycle in
>our DAG, and trying to write special-case code for untangling that
>cycle, as well as for "write-protecting" that directory, is a
>non-starter. So, despite the neat-O result, -0.9 for cost.
>
>
My brain is probably not completely wrapped around this either, but why
does this introduce a cycle in the DAG? Can you give an example?

-David Waite

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Aug 6 22:06:31 2003