kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> Ben Collins-Sussman and I spent some time this morning going over the
> both the old and new syntax, and we're +1 on the new. This proposal
> solves the peg problem.
>
> But, does this mean we'd lose the old syntaxes? The old syntaxes are:
>
> 1. diff [-r N[:M]] [--old OLD-TGT] [--new NEW-TGT] [PATH...]
> 2. diff -r N:M URL
> 3. diff [-r N[:M]] URL1[@N] URL2[@M]
>
> The new ones you're proposing are
>
> 1. diff [-r N[:M]] [TARGET[@REV]...]
> 2. diff --old=OLD-TGT[@OLDREV] --new=NEW-TGT[@NEWREV] [PATH...]
> 3. diff OLD-URL[@OLDREV] NEW-URL[@NEWREV]
>
> I'm just thinking about UI compatability and release scheduling. Can
> we release a diff syntax change in 1.1? That seems a bit much, unless
> the change *only* adds new syntaxes, doesn't take away any of the
> existing ones.
The only incompatible change the new syntax has is removing support
for the -r option in case 2 and 3. It would be no extra
implementation work to accept those options with their pre1.1
behavior. As far as I could tell, they were removed to prevent
confusion, since only case 1 really is guaranteed to diff the same
object at two different revisions. Perhaps we could mark them as
deprecated?
> > The patch covers nearly all of the new syntax except the case of
> > comparing a repository URL to a working copy. That code used the
> > update editor to generate a diff and I am not sure how best to rework
> > it to handle pegged diffs. I am open to suggestions on how to proceed
> > on that front.
>
> You probably mean the "update driver", right? The update editor is
> not used for diff, but one of two diff editors is.
>
> (My apologies for not being able to review the patch itself, just got
> meetings and some other stuff going on here lately.)
No worries, the patch itself isn't that important. As I was telling
Ben on IRC I mostly posted it so there would be some record of my work
outside of my computer. The "update driver" problem is what is
holding me up now, as reproduced in current HEAD in this thread:
http://www.contactor.se/~dast/svn/archive-2004-05/0389.shtml
The patch could be applied nearly as is with no loss in functionality,
but you won't get much benefit since diffs over renames still won't be
what you expect. If that approach sounds good, I will clean up the
work so far and post it again for review. Otherwise we can wait until
the update driver issue is figured out.
-Josh
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue May 11 21:03:55 2004