Re: The "follow copy history" initiative

Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:

>There are two approaches here:
>
> 1. as ghudson suggests, run RA->get_logs() on (5, foo.c), and verify
>that the (3, foo.c) is actually the same object.
>
> 2. throw a specific error ("future searching not yet implemented"),
>so that callers can catch the error and make a helpful suggestion ("try
>running 'svn cat -rHEAD' on the URL instead of the working file.")
>
>I'm much more inclined to go the second route for now, because it's much
>simpler. The first approach seems nice in an academic way, but I doubt
>it will be truly useful to users.
>
I absolutely agree. "sorry not implemented" is all right.

I still think the function should be able to return a list of results,
though.

-- 
Brane Čibej   <brane_at_xbc.nu>   http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org