On 10/3/06, Karl Fogel <kfogel@google.com> wrote:

*> rooneg@tigris.org writes:
*

*> > +What's wrong with this? Well, what if we need to rename A/B to X/Y so that
*

*> > +we can later rename X/Y to A/B? Not sure if there's a work around for that,
*

*> > +but I'm also not sure if there's a way to get that into the system anyway.
*

*>
*

*> I think when something like that happens in a single commit txn, we'd
*

*> just "fold it down" (or "reduce to lowest common denominator", to use
*

*> one more metaphor before actually saying exactly what I mean).
*

*>
*

*> In other words,
*

*>
*

*> mv A/B X/Y
*

*> mv X/Y A/B
*

*>
*

*> should reduce to a no-op. Do we actually do this folding right now?
*

*> I'm not sure; I think we should, though.
*

That's assuming that those are intended to be sequential, I was

assuming that they were intended to be simultaneous (i.e. swap the

locations of A/B and X/Y), which we can't actually do at this point.

-garrett

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org

For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Received on Tue Oct 3 23:24:30 2006