> I'm worried that this patch introduces sorting for diff output, but
> ignores other commands. If we start sorting the output we produce, then
> it should be sorted for all commands -- checkout, update, status, list,
> merge, switch, ...
Maybe it might already. I didnt look at every single
command but I made the change in the place Dan Berlin suggested,
in libsvn_repos/reporter.c, and that seemed to affect checkout
at the very least.
However, I will say, that the order in which things are checked
out or status reported is considerably less important than the
order in which files are diff'ed. One doesn't use those commands
for preparing patches and for producing editable output (in
general). However, producing a patch, especially one which you
may need to edit or split up into groups of files, is a far more
common task and a part of daily development. I'm having a hard
time thinking of a case where the order in which files are updated
will really matter, but I'm sure someone can think of one.
> IIRC, the last time we discussed this, there was a fairly good proposal
> as to where such a change should be made.
Ok I wasn't aware of previous discussions as I only recently started
reading this list again. However, when I originally posted about
this no-one other than Julian Foad mentioned any earlier work, and
he mentioned that there was only mild enthusiasm for making everything
sorted. Perhaps Julian and I should work together to see if we can
extend his earlier work to take node type (file vs dir) into account?
Julian?
Kean
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Nov 20 10:10:46 2005