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

Re: DAV lock-token decisions. (please read)

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: 2005-01-19 21:24:08 CET

Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman@collab.net> writes:

> That's just not true. From the very beginning, ra_dav was *always*
> sending a custom REPORT to describe a working-copy's local revisions
> to the server. The response was tree without file content; ra_dav
> then parsed the response and did many GET and PROPFIND requests to
> fetch content. So no, it never worked against a generic DAV server.
> Not then, not now.

For the record, in the beginning ra_dav was only sending REPORTs for
update operations, not for checkouts (which used PROPFINDs and GETs).
Also, note that even *today* we could be doing updates with PROPFINDs
and GETs -- we chose to let the server do tree delta calculations, but
I betcha the client could do this work, too.

As for the other custom REPORTs we use, those really aren't
*essential* to basic version control operation. 'svn log' is a
reporting mechanism only. Date-to-revision lookup is but a nicety.
And so on.

So, I don't think hope is lost for generic DeltaV support. But I do
think that pursuing such *right now* is a misuse of time and energy.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jan 19 21:29:23 2005

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.