On Jan 8, 2008 12:29 PM, Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> > Tonight I was wondering who made use of svn_fs_get_mergeinfo_for_tree()
> > (because I wasn't happy about the fact that it uses a filtering function
> > instead of just being streamy/callback-y like so many other of our APIs).
> > The only consumer appears to be 'svn log -g', which is using it to filter
> > out "branching copies" based on, I think, whether or not the copy resulted
> > in a mergeinfo diff that matches what you'd expect when doing a copy. Only
> > problem is, what we now expect when doing a copy is no mergeinfo change at
> > all, right?
> >
> > Has this code been updated since we made these changes to the 'copy' behavior?
>
> No. I've been working on updating the tests to actually reflect the
> current copy and merge behavior on trunk (this is happening on the
> fix-log-mergeinfo-tests branch). I hope to have this finished soon.
> After that, I'll need to see which tests are failing as a result of the
> changes to 'copy' behavior, and then fix them. The filter function was
> an ugly hack from the beginning, and I will be happy to see it go.
>
> > (My primary goal with this question is that I'd like to know if we can lose
> > svn_fs_get_mergeinfo_for_tree() before I go and try to implement it anew on
> > the 'reintegrate' branch.)
>
> Understood. I'll see what I can come up with in the next day or two.
Also, don't forget to look at Kamesh's new
svn_fs_get_merged_and_committed_revs or whatever API on the issue-2897
branch to see if it's useful to you (I have plans to implement it
without sqlite, fwiw).
--dave
--
David Glasser | glasser@davidglasser.net | http://www.davidglasser.net/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-01-08 19:19:09 CET