Yes, having read the code, it doesn't make sense to me either. So I guess I
should try it and be certain.
On 9/2/05, Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman@collab.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 2, 2005, at 1:20 AM, Jean-Marc Godbout wrote:
> >
> > Well thanks for creating doubt in my mind. I was certain that on
> > the unpatched "ls"used to complain when it couldn't find the
> > "checked-in" property. But I might be wrong, i might have done
> > something wrong here. I'll verify. And yes, if there are problems
> > then they should be fixed asap so that eventually this behavior
> > could be phased out. I'll get back to you on that.
> >
>
> I can't imagine why svn_ra_get_dir() would care about the DAV:checked-
> in property; it's not necessary at all to fill in the svn_dirent_t.
>
>
>
>
> --
> www.collab.net <http://www.collab.net> <> CollabNet | Distributed
> Development On Demand
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
>
>
Received on Fri Sep 2 16:58:52 2005