"SteveKing" <steveking@gmx.ch> writes:
> Would it be ok if I try making a patch with such a new callback?
> Or better question: would such a patch have any chance of getting applied?
>
> I'm thinking of something like that:
>
> - taking the callback definition out of the svn_wc.h and putting
> it into svn_client.h since the callback wouldn't be used only
> to indicate changes in the working copy but on other occasions too
> (like the export command which doesn't change the working copy).
> - parameter for the enum which indicates the struct used in the union
> - parameter for the baton, the pool and the union itself
> - the union would have first only one struct: svn_wc_notify_info_t
> which has the same members as the parameters of the callback
> as it has them right now.
> - later the union will be expanded by additional structs to indicate
> more detailed progress information.
This sounds pretty reasonable to me.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Aug 12 22:19:00 2003