Hi Gerco,
Like David, I had a quick scan over the patch. I think it looks pretty
good, though I'll wait for your next post to do a proper review. (Could
you update libsvn_ra_svn/protocol next time round, though?)
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 05:36:52PM +0100, Gerco Ballintijn wrote:
> David Glasser wrote:
> >
> >(For what it's worth, I still think that an API that lets you set
> >revprops after running through the editor tree would be better, since
> >you could do signatures and the like, but one could still do that with
> >a preliminary "dry run" anyway.)
> >
>
> Do you mean pass them as apart of the svn_delta_editor_t::close_edit()
> call? I guess moving the parameter from the get_commit_editor() calls
> to the close_edit() is relatively straightforward; however, I have no
> idea on the impact of that move on the ra_dav implementation. I have
> not spent much time there (the code was somewhat frightening :-)
>
I think David might have been suggesting an additional call -
change_rev_prop(), perhaps (or 'properties', accepting a hash?).
The ra_dav code is a little scary, but if we can get this working over
ra_svn first, we can work out what needs to be done over DAV.
> A separate issue was (is) whether to ignore, to filter, or to flag the
> standard revision properties as errors when passed in the table.
>
I think it would make sense to disallow any changes to the svn:
properties, since they're already set through other processes (and you
wouldn't want, for example, to have to work out whether someone could
override svn:author).
I also wondered whether we should be calling the pre- and post-
revprop-change hooks, or whether we just leave it to the pre-commit
hook.
Regards,
Malcolm
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Mon Feb 19 19:53:48 2007