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