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

Re: svn commit: r25251 - in trunk/subversion: include libsvn_ra_svn svnserve

From: Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-svn-dev_at_farside.org.uk>
Date: 2007-06-01 10:54:03 CEST

On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 09:28:05PM -0700, hwright@tigris.org wrote:
> Really fix the ra_svn compatibility issue for 'svn log -g'. Introduce a new
> format character, 'B', which can be used to specify an optional boolean
> value. Use this value for the optional include-merged-revisions paramater.

Nicely done!

> --- trunk/subversion/svnserve/serve.c (original)
> +++ trunk/subversion/svnserve/serve.c Thu May 31 21:28:05 2007
> @@ -1551,17 +1551,22 @@
> apr_array_header_t *paths, *full_paths;
> svn_ra_svn_item_t *elt;
> int i;
> - apr_uint64_t limit;
> + apr_uint64_t limit, include_merged_revs_param;
> log_baton_t lb;
> /* Parse the arguments. The usual optional element pattern "(?n)"
> isn't used for the limit argument because pre-1.3 clients don't
> know to send it. Nor is the pattern used for the include_merged_revisions
> argument, because pre-1.5 clients don't know to send it, either. */

That comment's actually pretty confusing: neither of the limit nor
include_merged_revisions options are considered optional in the
protocol, so the format we're using is entirely correct.

> + SVN_ERR(svn_ra_svn_parse_tuple(params, pool, "l(?r)(?r)bb?n?B", &paths,

I realise you didn't update libsvn_ra_svn/protocol originally to
document the extract include_merged_revisions option - could you do that
as well? (And could you include some text that explains what limit
should be set to to indicate 'unlimited'? We really _should_ have made
it optional, but too late for that now...).


  • application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Fri Jun 1 10:54:18 2007

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.