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

Re: Auditing Design - v1 (was: Re: [merge-tracking] 'svn blame' auditing)

From: Stefan Haller <haller_at_ableton.com>
Date: 2007-02-25 11:35:09 CET

mark benedetto king <mbk@lowlatency.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 06:54:04PM -0800, Daniel Rall wrote:
> > > 'svn blame':
> > > Two additional columns for each line, one with the original revision
> > > number, and one with the original author of that line. Unlike other
> > > commands, we do not need to worry about multiple source revisions,
> > > because each line can have at most one author.
> What should be done if the merge included revisions that were themselves
> merges? Should those revisions be treated as "original" or is the problem
> recursive? Should that question be answered on the command-line?

Treating those revisions as "original" doesn't seem very useful to me in
practice. I'd certainly want to see the "real" original revision in

Stefan Haller
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Feb 25 11:35:43 2007

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