Re: PATCH: "revision" parameter to svn_client_status

Julian Foad <julianfoad@btopenworld.com> writes:

> 1) I'm pretty certain that my patch didn't change the level of
> atomicity of any current Subversion client operation (with the
> possible exception of status on externals).

If svn_client_status is now *not* getting a hard revision number,
that's bad. We don't want 'svn status -u foo bar' to get two different
version numbers for 'foo' and 'bar' because someone committed while
'foo's status was coming down.

On the flip side, if 'foo' and 'bar' represent paths in two different
repositories, a single fetch of "the revision that is HEAD" won't do
-- but this might be something to address later.

> 2) I'd still be interested to know whether ra_dav:make_reporter is
> atomic when it does not specify a revision number. This determines
> whether "svn status" and other commands are atomic at the level of
> an individual recursive target. (The client still loops over
> multiple explicitly-mentioned targets; that is a different issue.)

Yes, it is atomic for that one operation (but not across multiple
ones). When we look at mod_dav_svn's parsing of that XML element, we
see that it boils down to an atol() call. So, you better have a
number there, even it is SVN_INVALID_REVNUM (and not the string "HEAD"
or such).

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Sep 22 18:35:11 2003