Is --copies-only good enough? What about if a node was replaced by deletion
and addition? Isn't that something you want to know about when doing the
kind of genealogy type operations you were talking about in another thread
here? Sounds like what you really need is --tree-changes-only.
Michael
On 4/3/07, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net> wrote:
>
> Peter Lundblad wrote:
> > C. Michael Pilato writes:
> >> So maybe there's no compat mode other than for the client, in the
> absense of
> >> the special flag, to raise SVN_ERR_UNSUPPORTED_FEATURE. Or we could do
> our
> >> best, only raising that error if a) the server won't support
> --copies-only
> >> and b) a non-verbose log request was made.
> >>
> >
> > I thinkn this is one of the cases where the RA layers shouldn't try to
> > emulate the API, but let the caller decide what to do.
>
> That's fine with me. I do have another concern, though -- a server that
> doesn't recognize --copies-only isn't going to just say, "I don't
> recognize
> --copies-only." It's going to send a potentially massive stream of log
> information down the wire to a client who ultimately doesn't want it.
>
> That's kinda bad, right?
>
> --
> C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net>
> CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
>
>
>
Received on Tue Apr 3 17:06:58 2007