On 9/8/07, David Glasser <glasser@davidglasser.net> wrote:
> Hmm. So, what I mean is, the "+ blabla" change is also encoded inside
> the 'eJzTUMgvSM3TLcrPL' bytes, right?
No it wasn't designed this way. (I'm now wondering whether Mark did
also think this way). In the part III of the design doc, it's
explained what's in each part of the patch. Basically, there's
nothing *twice* in the patch (but property changes) for the sake of
redundancy. This also avoids any discrepancy with both information
being synchronized: what if the user changes the unidiff part of a
patch and tries to apply with 'svn patch'? He might think 'svn patch'
is going to handle it properly, where this is not the case yet as 'svn
patch' doesn't read the unidiff part. I really think each information
should live in the patch once. I made a special case with properties
since it's really helpful to have them displayed in cleartext.
But hey, if people think it's better to include text changes in the
svnpatch block too so that 'svn patch' can handle it all, let's do it
:-)
Cheers,
Charles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Sep 8 18:55:16 2007