Re: Diff --old --new: too many peg revision specifiers

Julian Foad wrote:
> kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>> Julian Foad <julianfoad@btopenworld.com> writes:
>>
>>> Patch attached. OK so far?
>>
>> Looks like a sensible step to me, & the patch looks good (I haven't
>> applied it, but reviewed it in-place).

r18908.

>>> Next step: I think we shouldn't drop support for "-r" before v2, but I
>>> think it is OK for us to deprecate an aspect of the User Interface in
>>> a minor release just as we deprecate APIs. I propose to remove the
>>> mention of "-r" from the main description, and add a note stating it
>>> is accepted for backward compatibility, and describing its meaning.
>>
>> +1

This isn't as straightforward as it seemed, for two reasons:

1. This "old & new" form of "diff" is designed for both comparing two separate
paths and, when "--new" is omitted, for comparing two revisions of "a single
path" (whatever that means) and the latter form requires "-r X:Y".

2. Our semantics for what we broadly call "peg revisions" are in a bit of a
mess in some regards (where we allow "@REV" on a WC-path, in particular).

I need to do some more work on this.

- Julian

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Mar 18 23:02:17 2006