On 3/17/06, Eric Gillespie <epg@pretzelnet.org> wrote:
> "Ben Collins-Sussman" <sussman@red-bean.com> writes:
>
> > I think this is expected. If you look at fs.c:merge(), two deletes of
> > the same thing are considered mergeable. So you end up creating a new
> > revision identical to the previous one, with no changed paths.
>
> Heh, yes, it is expected by somene who reads fs.c:merge(), or
> someone like you with a good memory of it. It isn't expected by
> anyone else.
>
> This happens pretty often, and not one victim i've dealt with
> understood it. I was quite surprised the first time it was
> reported to me, too. I said then that i think this is a bug and
> i still say it now.
>
Wow, I've never heard of anyone accidentally committing an 'emtpy'
revision like this. I mean, I know it's *theoretically* possible, but
in 6 years I've not seen a report about it. Or maybe I just don't
remember such reports.
I do remember some old list conversations where we decided that
libsvn_fs would not enforce any sort of rule that 'commits must not be
empty'. Didn't we agree on that?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Mar 17 20:29:26 2006