Re: [PATCH] Re: The new svn_wc_adm_*_depth functions.

"Sander Striker" <striker@apache.org> writes:
> I would think so. It would make much sense to have a foo2() at some
> point, but not a foo(). The whole point of versioning is to not
> have versions in your function names I would think ;).

I assume you meant "would not make much sense".

> > IMHO, we should do this. By resetting our APIs back to the
> > names-of-first-choice, we avoid names growing arbitrarily long (think
> > 3.0).
>
> +1.

+1 to your +1 :-).

-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Mar 11 18:41:47 2004