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

Re: [RFC] Reverse blame

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: 2007-09-18 16:29:59 CEST

Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> I've started to get down the road of having a generic ancestry walker,
> and I'm starting to realize how idiotic our blame implementation is. By
> having to wait for svn_repos_get_file_revs2() count up all the revisions
> on the server and then send them to the client, we wait a lot of time
> and resources. The ancestry walker lends itself to sending file
> revisions in a streamy way, as they are found, youngest to oldest.
> This, in turn, leads toward a youngest->oldest blame implementation,
> instead of our current oldest->youngest implementation.
> I'll like to propose that we resurrect Dan Berlin's old reverse blame
> patch, found here:
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2005-03/1036.shtml

If there are no compat issues (or we've addressed them suitably), and
performance gains to be had, need we even discuss this? +1.

C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand

Received on Tue Sep 18 16:30:12 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.