On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 04:37:03PM +0000, Julian Foad wrote:
> Do we want the reversal switch to apply to "-r" as well? That is not
> necessary in the basic cases (such as "-r X:Y") but we might decide it is
> convenient and consistent. Indeed it might enable some desirable diffs
> that are not possible at present: like the reverse of a plain diff (WC
> against BASE -> BASE against WC). (Am I right about that? If so, a better
> solution to that particular problem might be to introduce a "WORKING" or
> "WC" revision-keyword.)
>
It would allow us to ask for both a WORKING->BASE diff, which currently
isn't supported by libsvn_wc at all, and for a WORKING->repos diff, which
is 'supported' but extremely buggy (due primarily to its non-testability).
I'm not really keen on the idea of a --reverse switch anyway: -c is
already syntactic sugar for something else (-rN-1:N), but that something
else is common enough that I think it's a good idea, whereas I'm not
sure that the reverse idea is common enough to warrant it.
I've also been thinking lately about whether a WORKING keyword would
make sense, and I kind-of like the idea, though I'm not sure whether
I've thought through all the consequences.
Regards,
Malcolm
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jan 13 21:06:54 2006