Re: WC -> WC copy/move operations and repository access

Mark Phippard wrote:
> I hate the idea of svn cp contacting the repository. I think we all
> do. Where I think I differ from everyone else is that I am not
> convinced that creating the mergeinfo in a WC to WC copy is vital. At
> least in terms of a release stopper.

Mark, I know I suggested this on the phone call we had about this topic, but
I can't recall why it wasn't feasible:

   Can our mergeinfo querying logic not just grow smart enough to realize
   that, duh, a copy in an item's history necessarily means that the
   pre-copy revisions are already part of the item's history -- and by
   extension, part of its mergeinfo -- too?

The rebuttal to this was, I think, that we won't know the difference between
"mergeinfo for the copy was never recorded" and "mergeinfo was explicitly
removed". But that doesn't make sense to me, and further, seems like we'll
be starting off the bat with bogus assumptions when using pre-1.5
repositories. (Surely not every copy made pre-1.5-upgrade carries an
explicit desire to unrecorded mergeinfo, right?)

It's likely, though, that I'm misremembering here. Can you set the record
straight?

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