Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:
> Well, I initially only noticed the issue in the svn_ra interface, but
> I'm not surprised that it's more widespread. Had I thought about it, I
> suppose I wouldn't have claimed that it would be a trivial change to
> make now.
You originally described the difficulty as "medium" (though for
different reasons), which turns out not to be far off base.
> * The harder it would be to make the change now, the more awful it
> would be to make the change in an API-preserving matter later.
>
> As I've said before, I'm okay with deciding to punt this change on the
> basis that we're likely to never implement --depth (gstein's
> rationale). I'm not so okay with deciding to punt this change because
> we think we will implement --depth but that it would be better to work
> around the current API than it would be to fix it while we have the
> chance.
I can't really judge how likely we are to implement --depth. Have
never been a huge fan, but maybe one day it will seem more attractive
than it does now.
In any case, silence now doesn't mean we can't change our minds later.
There will, eventually, be an API-breaking release, and if we've
settled the --depth question by then, we can do the feature.
> So far no one has stood up in strong defense of --depth. Once again,
> this is your big chance.
<listening>
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Dec 26 07:12:40 2003