Re: [Issue 2959] [sparse-directories] depth upgrade against old servers is broken

Karl Fogel wrote:
> Although the reporter is sort of involved here (since it's being
> driven), I'm not sure this new vtable callback would be consistent in
> spirit with what the reporter does. Every other callback in the
> reporter is unidirectional: it pushes data *to* the server. Now we'd
> be adding a callback that gets information from (or "about") the
> server. But I feel like we'd just be doing it just to avoid adding a
> new parameter to svn_wc_crawl_revisions3(), rather than because it
> makes architectural sense.

I was just trying to reduce code churn. Besides the new parameter, you
would now have to call svn_ra_has_capability() every time you call
svn_ra_do_update() (or switch(), diff(), ...) and
svn_wc_crawl_revisions(). I think that's more intrusive than adding a
new reporter function, and making svn_wc_crawl_revisons() use it directly.

-- 
Vlad
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org