Re: Proposal for $Revision$ keyword amendment

Molle Bestefich wrote:
> I'm not trying to shoehorn it in, I'm trying to find out what's the
> cleanest possible way to do it.

I said "shoehorn" because you've decided on the solution before you've fully
examined the problem. Rather than looking at the architecture that exists now,
and why it works the way it does, you want to add something off to the side
whose sole purpose is to accomplish your task, even though there are existing
ways to do it that don't involve changing anything, except your chosen project
management style.

>>It's just not an acceptable performance penalty to potentially change every
>>single file on the off chance that one of them needs keywords expanded.
>
>
> I'm not sure where you're coming from.
> Who ever talked about changing every file?
> Only files with UpdateRev in their svn:keywords will get have
> expansion performed.
> Please clarify your concern.

The Subversion WC does not contain a master catalog of all files. Each
directory contains admin files that describe files in that directory alone.
Thus, the only way to ensure that all files in a given WC are postprocessed as
you suggest is to walk the WC (see my message to Greg) on every checkin.

John

-- 
John Peacock
Director of Information Research and Technology
Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group
4720 Boston Way
Lanham, MD 20706
301-459-3366 x.5010
fax 301-429-5747
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org