The comment is there because there's currently really no reason to be
using that API instead of the simpler one. We need to either start
having a reason for using the more complex API (eventual goal, in
which case we could remove the comment), or use the simpler API for
the time being (and retain the comment).
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Madan S. wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Pl. find attached a simple patch that removes an comment thats no
> longer relevant (on the merge-tracking branch).
>
> [[[
> Remove irrelevant comment.
>
> (In branches/merge-tracking)
>
> * subversion/libsvn_client/diff.c:
> (parse_merge_info): We already use svn_client__get_prop_from_wc().
> ]]]
>
> Regards,
> Madan.
> Remove irrelevant comment.
>
> (In branches/merge-tracking)
>
> * subversion/libsvn_client/diff.c:
> (parse_merge_info): We already use svn_client__get_prop_from_wc().
> Index: subversion/libsvn_client/diff.c
> ===================================================================
> --- subversion/libsvn_client/diff.c (revision 20533)
> +++ subversion/libsvn_client/diff.c (working copy)
> @@ -1663,9 +1663,6 @@
> _("'%s' is not under version control"),
> svn_path_local_style(wcpath, pool));
>
> - /* ### Use svn_wc_prop_get() would actually be sufficient for now.
> - ### DannyB thinks that later we'll need behavior more like
> - ### svn_client__get_prop_from_wc(). */
> SVN_ERR(svn_client__get_prop_from_wc(props, SVN_PROP_MERGE_INFO,
> wcpath, FALSE, entry, adm_access,
> TRUE, ctx, pool));
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Tue Jul 11 20:01:24 2006