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

Re: [PATCH] [Issue 1715] svn protocol extensions

From: Peter N. Lundblad <peter_at_famlundblad.se>
Date: 2004-06-27 10:52:28 CEST

On Sat, 26 Jun 2004, Greg Hudson wrote:

> On Sat, 2004-06-26 at 14:38, Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> > - I'm sending text deltas and no checksums. Should I? (Same question also
> > applies to DAV. I will be consistent about this.)
>
> get_file has no checksums, so I'd say no, it's probably not worth it.
> Others might disagree, though.
>
Both the protocol file and the code look like get-file indeed has a
checksum. What do I miss?

> > - Might be good to allow early cancelation as in the editor command set.
> > Is this necessary or overkill?
>
> If the API allows early cancellation (i.e. the consumer function can
> cancel), then it's necessary. Otherwise, it's overkill. I don't think
> your current API allows early cancellation, nor is it really important
> for it to do so.
>
The callback might return an error. For example, the blame command checks
for cancelation for each call of the callback. Might be good if you by
mistake say "svn blame -r1:HEAD" and it takes a long time. But maybe you
can just close the connection then?

Thanks,
//Peter

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Jun 27 10:41:12 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.