John Peacock wrote:
> Mark Phippard wrote:
>> Performance is not related to my point #1. You are correct that is
>> related to point #2. Please re-read if necessary. Point #1 is about a
>> valid feature that the GUI provides.
>
> OK, you're right. I'm arguing about the asynchronous log entry, which I
> thought was the motivation for both #1 and #2. Reading between the
> lines now I see that TSVN must be running the equivalent of 'svn status'
> when the user goes to commit, then presents a dialogue and allows the
> user to deselect file before the actual commit is started. All
> perfectly valid uses of the API, but not the way that the CLI uses the
> API at all; not wrong but different.
Actually, it goes slightly farther than that - it runs status and shows
that, but one can also interactively perform other commands, like adding an
unversioned file that shows up, or reverting an unwanted change, or viewing
the diff to help write the log. I often even edit the file further while
reviewing the diff (if I catch myself accidentally having made whitespace
changes or other unwanted cruft).
It's very non-linear, and wouldn't fit in the CLI, but I think it's one of
the biggest places where tsvn is offering a valuable feature that the CLI
can't, instead of just having gooier shininess (or is that shinier
gooeyness?).
>> I think there have been plenty of complaints about the performance of svn
>> status on Windows. This is nothing new.
>
> Thus laying the blame firmly on NTFS, where it belongs... ;-)
But it's an issue nontheless, and the need to work around it does drive a
lot of the caching that tsvn does that the CLI does not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat May 21 19:36:45 2005