On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 09:54 -0600, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:
> > I think
> > svn_fs_merge should be demanding that the two root objects come from the
> > same in-memory FS object (something you can check with an assert), and
> > it's only a coincidence that neither back end puts much information in
> > the in-memory FS object and thus doesn't really care. If mod_dav_svn is
> > not obeying this constraint, then the bug is in mod_dav_svn.
> Why?
Because it's sort of an accident of convenience that the parameters of
svn_fs_merge *can* even refer to two different memory FS objects. It's
just a convenience that roots refer back to the FS they belong to, and
you could imaging the svn_fs API requiring an fs parameter on every
function.
We have no cross-FS operations, and so every libsvn_fs function should
only be worrying about dealing with one FS object. svn_fs_merge as it
is implemented today may have very few concerns operating on two
different FS objects which are handles to the same FS, but that could be
very different in another back end.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Feb 27 20:20:48 2006