Kean Johnston wrote:
>> 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?
My point is that there /might/ be a better place to do this than in the
diff driver, such that more commands would benefit from the change. I'm
not saying that you should do everything at once, but if we can get a
bit more benefit for the same effort, I'd say that's a good thing.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Sun Nov 20 11:06:30 2005