Re: Towards a native-FS-backed filesystem

kfogel@collab.net writes:

> "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato@collab.net> writes:
> > > I don't care much whether we do the work on a branch or on the trunk
> > > with a disabling #ifdef. One requires more merging work and one
> > > potentially puts vestigial code into releases (or requires us to remove
> > > code in dist.sh, which some might find distasteful), but neither cost is
> > > very high.
> >
> > I prefer this work be done on a branch. Merging isn't scary,
> > navigating around #ifdefs is annoying, and doing magic code removal
> > tricks in our distribution script is silly.
>
> I think you might be overestimating the complexity here.
>
> First: the abstraction work (independent of the new backend) is
> destined for trunk as soon as possible, right?

Yes. But then, so are all changes to Subversion's software not made
specifically for a maintainance branch. What's your point?

> If that's so, then once the abstraction is in place,

Oooooooh. Is *this* is the complexity that I'm "overestimating"?

/me recalls the hours he's spent thinking/writing/having phone calls
about this very abstraction, and chuckles...

> No "magic code removal trick" was ever proposed. I think you may have
> something different in mind from what I was talking about (and even
> what I was talking about isn't truly necessary).

And I quote (the same thing I quoted in my reply):

   "and one potentially puts vestigial code into releases (or requires
   us to remove code in dist.sh, which some might find distasteful)"

So while no formal proposition was made, the idea was floated. And it
was floated by someone other than you, making "what [you were] talking
about" rather out-of-scope with respect to my reply.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Mar 30 20:59:16 2004