On 5/29/07, David James <james@cs.toronto.edu> wrote:
> Hi Sage,
>
> Nice patch! I looked over your changes and they generally look good. I
> found a few places in the example scripts where you forgot to update
> references to the old classes, so I fixed these before committing.
>
> In your log message, try to remember to keep a list of the functions
> you change. Try also to explain the rationale behind your changes
> briefly. Here's an example.
>
Sorry about that, my previous open source work was on a project that
had pretty loose guidelines for commit messages, so I'm getting used
to the subversion standard. I'll make sure my next one is better.
>
> I've committed your patch with a few tweaks in r25196.
>
Thanks!
> > RemoteRepository and LocalRepository seem more like RA objects.
>
> That's right. Actually, the local and remote repository classes only
> allow direct access to the repository -- they don't let you, for
> example, access a WC. Therefore it makes more sense to call them
> repository classes, I think.
>
> In the Python bindings, I'm planning to split out our support for WC's
> and repositories into separate APIs, so that users can perform client
> operations directly on a repository, or on a working copy, as they
> please.
>
> It probably also makes sense to write a 'Client' class which wraps the
> functionality of the RemoteRepository and WorkingCopy classes into a
> single interface for folks who would like to do both with a single
> class, but I consider this to be a less important feature.
>
I've started a stub file for the WC, but it's not in patchable shape
yet. I really like the idea of separating objects for WC changes and
repository changes, it makes it more clear to the user what changes
are actually being made (WC or repository).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu May 31 00:05:11 2007