On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 04:29:16PM -0500, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> Malcolm Rowe wrote:
> > It's already there: issue 2683, with substantially the same patch.
> > Note that WORKING:<something> diffs are likely to be a little buggy at
> > the moment, at least partly because they don't have any test coverage.
> > What do people think about adding in support for the WORKING keyword and
> > seeing what shakes loose?
> +1, as long as we add test coverage as well.
That'd be the bit about seeing what comes loose :-). Yes, at a minimum
I'd like basic -rWORKING tests added for each command so that we can see
we haven't seriously broken anything.
> This is also related to issue 2544, which is a request to have 'svn
> blame' work against the working copy. There's a patch adding WORKING
> keyword support (among other things) attached to that issue.
I'd prefer support for the keyword went in separately to the 'support
WORKING for blame' API patch (which I see no reason we can't commit now,
Received on Mon Mar 19 22:34:23 2007
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored