Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2005, at 6:28 AM, Simon Comeau Martel wrote:
>
>>> Say you have a working copy at r5, and commit foo.c, which creates
>>> r9. Certainly it's safe for the working copy to assume that its
>>> foo.c is at r9. But it's not safe to assume that the parent
>>> directory is at r9: what if somebody added or removed entries from
>>> the directory somewhere in r6, r7, or r8? What if somebody changed
>>> the directory's properties? Until you run 'svn up', it's not safe to
>>> assume that the working copy really has r9 of of the directory.
>>
>> But if you have a working copy at r5 and your commit r6, (ie: a bump of
>> exacly 1), wouldn't it be safe to assume that your entire working copy
>> is at r6, without an update?
>>
>
> Absolutely. But this is an incredibly rare and contrived case. Most
> of the time, you have a working copy made out of many mixed revisions,
> and 'svn commit' creates a new HEAD revision that is more than 1
> greater than the greatest revnum in the working copy. If you'd like to
> write optimization code for this teeny-tiny edge-case, it's certainly
> doable. I doubt it will make much difference.
... and we might well deem the extra complexity of an unnecessary edge case
to be a greater burden to maintainability than it is a benefit.
Max.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jan 5 15:52:57 2005