[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: The "follow copy history" initiative

From: Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_MIT.EDU>
Date: 2004-04-01 06:00:51 CEST

On Wed, 2004-03-31 at 21:37, Branko ibej wrote:
> I have a problem with this patch: it only looks in the _past_. That
> restriction is unnecessary (and evil :-), you should be able to peg
> /foo/bar/baz@100 and ask where it is at revision 200.

We discussed this in the earlier (pre-1.0) thread. Consensus was that
we can't trace into the future across renames of the file or its parent
directories (because all copies look the same, whether or not they were
renames, and even if there's only one copy of the same node in the
target rev, it's too hard to find given the current FS schema), but we
can check if <future-rev,path> is the same node-copy, and use that if

It looks like Shlomi's code just returns the unmodified pathname if the
peg_revision is earlier than past_revision, but that's dangerous.

> I also don't like the name of the funciton, obviously, because it's not
> just about files. I suggest svn_fs_get_node_path.

I don't like the name either (it's too long and, as brane said, it
shouldn't be specific to files), but "svn_fs_get_node_path" sounds like
a simple FS operation. I don't immediately have a good suggestion.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Apr 1 06:01:09 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.