On Mon, 5 Jul 2004, Michael W Thelen wrote:
> * kfogel@collab.net <kfogel@collab.net> [2004-07-05 18:40]:
> > I guess this whole bit might change now, with the suggestion of
> > "-rHEAD:HEAD-10" syntax that others have made. (So I won't comment on
> > any of the parsing code.)
> >
> > As far as backwards compatibilty: When the server is new enough to
> > understand the new type of request, there should be no extra round
> > trip. When the server is old, it can error back to the client, which
> > the client can detect, and only *then* do an extra round-trip to
> > get the offset revision by number so it can re-request.
> >
> > So, here's a wicked question: shouldn't an offset of "HEAD-10" on a
> > file show you the last ten revisions *in which that file changed*, not
> > simply the revisions numbered HEAD through HEAD-10? :-) (Or did your
> > code already do that, and I just missed it?)
>
> If the repos HEAD revision is 100, I would expect HEAD:HEAD-10 to return
> the log messages for the range 100 through 90, regardless of how many
> changes were undergone by the target(s) in that range. I see "HEAD-10"
> as specifying a revision number independent of any targets.
>
I also agree. I would vote for a specific command line option for this. I
see no real use for this except for the log case.
Regards,
//Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Jul 6 12:19:04 2004