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

Re: [PROPOSAL] Dealing with large directories/difficult to organize trees.

From: Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_MIT.EDU>
Date: 2005-07-11 20:18:54 CEST

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 11:25 -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> On Jul 11, 2005, at 1:18 AM, Greg Hudson wrote:
> >
> >> Backend wise we'll need to extend the reporter to handle saying what
> >> you don't want.

> > As I mentioned on IRC, I think there may be ways to abuse link_path to
> > accomplish this. It's not the best option in the steady state, but
> > as a
> > compatibility hack it's probably better than receiving and ignoring a
> > huge swath of updates.

> What sort of abuse do you speak of? Can you work through an example?

For non-switch operations, link_path is followed in the target as well
as the source.

So, if you don't want to receive updates to a directory, you could
invoke something like svn_repos_link_path(baton, path, "/",
target_rev, ...). The libsvn_repos reporter would then treat both the
source and the target of the update for that directory as being the root
directory as of the target rev; thus, it would send no changes.

A simpler and more elegant approach would be to call
svn_repos_set_path(baton, path, target_rev, ...), but this won't work if
the path has been deleted in the target rev, since you're not allowed to
set_path or link_path to something nonexistent.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jul 11 20:21:07 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.