On Oct 4, 2007, at 11:02 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>
> If it comes down to not being able to [heal 1.4 damage on the fly],
> what do you prefer? An
> absolute bump or just one when --depth is used?
I would absolutely prefer an absolute bump.
The problem I see with saying "depth is a 1.5 feature and using it
commits you to 1.5" is that it requires the user to remember every
command s/he's ever typed, cross-mapped to every working copy s/he
may have. The problem I see with the situation in general is that
these corrupted working copies misbehave in ways you might not
necessarily notice for a while (depending on which subtrees got
overpopulated), so by the time you notice the misbehavior you may
long have forgotten that one foolish experiment with "--depth".
> I could easily see GUI clients adding a 1.4-compatibility preference
> that triggered us to just hide the depth option from the dialogs and
> always use infinite/unknown.
>
> I actually do not think it would be that difficult to explain that
> depth is a 1.5 feature and using it commits you to using 1.5 clients.
> I hate the idea of an absolute format bump.
Me too. But I hate even more the idea of a lurking, piecemeal, hit
you when you least expect it, dependent on really hard-to-explain
abstract features, leaves no evidence, sometimes-the-magic-works
format bump.
-==-
Jack Repenning
Chief Technology Officer
CollabNet, Inc.
8000 Marina Boulevard, Suite 600
Brisbane, California 94005
office: +1 650.228.2562
mobile: +1 408.835.8090
raindance: +1 877.326.2337, x844.7461
aim: jackrepenning
skype: jrepenning
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Oct 4 20:09:40 2007