[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: [merge-tracking] 'svn blame' auditing

From: Daniel Rall <dlr_at_collab.net>
Date: 2007-02-21 19:51:33 CET

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> I've decided to investigate what needs to be done to implement 'svn
> blame' auditing support. For those unfamiliar with the problem, the use
> case is simple. Quoting [1]: "If you merge rN into a branch B, and rN
> was committed by author A, then svn blame should show the changed lines
> in B as last touched by A, even if the merge was committed by you and
> you are not A. This must also work when merging a range of revisions
> with different authors."

Behavioral changes to 'blame' should be designed concurrently with
changes to 'log', and probably 'status --show-updates' (and 'info'?).
Basically, to any API/command that carries a user name.

Once "how it's supposed to work" is defined, these changes can be
implemented incrementally (though, once you've got the functionality
for one command, it should be very easy to roll it out to others!).

> Before I begin, though. I would like to know if
> a) Anybody else is currently working on this.

Not to my knowledge.

> b) Anybody has any suggestions/recommendations as to where to begin.

Let's start by zeroing in on a really solid definition how this is
supposed to work. I'd volunteer to roll that into the func spec,
while you're working on implementing it for the 'log' or 'blame'

A few points to consider:

- We should be able to get both the user name of the original
committer and/or the user name of the actual committer. (The
requirement needs to be reworded to reflect this.)

- Should We provide an API/command-line switch for which names to
show, rather than always showing both user names? I tend to think so.
How would this (new?) switch interact with --verbose (e.g. for 'log')?

- If we only show one user name at a time, should it default to the
current behavior of showing the actual committer's name, or the
behavior suggested by the requirment of showing the original
committer's name? I tend to think the former, to maintain backwards
> If all goes well, I hope to be able to start posting patches in the next
> couple of weeks.

Fantastic, Hyrum!

> [1] http://subversion.tigris.org/merge-tracking/requirements.html#auditing

  • application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Wed Feb 21 19:51:59 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.