Re: [PROPOSAL] Move sleeping for timestamps to libsvn_wc

On 3/13/07, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net> wrote:
> Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> > I like this idea. Actually I've never understood why
> > sleep_for_timestamps stuff is in libsvn_client.
>
> I could be wrong, but I think it lives in _client at the moment because we
> wanted to sleep the minimum amount for a given high-level operation. The
> worry was with a single person running 'svn' in a scripted situation, not
> running any-ol-WC-library-consumer. And rather than sleep once per changed
> file, for example, we much preferred to sleep once per update, for example.
>
Michael, thanks for clarification. But I think that wc operations is
general enough to sleep only once for operation. For example in update
we can sleep in close_edit(), instead in sleeping after each file.

-- 
Ivan Zhakov
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org