"David Glasser" <glasser_at_davidglasser.net> writes:
> On Feb 13, 2008 9:12 PM, Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_red-bean.com> wrote:
>> I just hate to add a public API before we're certain we'll need it for
>> anything else. Could we wait until the second fs capability we need,
>> and do it then? Then at least we'd know fs caps aren't a one-off...
>
> I mean, you're already adding a repository capability API which only
> has one capability... if you're going to turn around and do "try and
> see if it fails", you might as well just do that back in the RA code.
> I can see doing this the "try and see" way or the "ask if it's the
> right version" way, but going halfway seems odd to me.
Well, I added the svn_repos API because doing it that way got rid of a
fair amount of code duplication among the RA layers (though not all).
This also gives the outside world a clear way to ask questions about a
repository's capabilities. But an svn_fs_has_capability() API would
only be used by Subversion itself -- in fact, probably only by
libsvn_repos -- because for the rest of the world, the obvious &
recommended entry point would be svn_repos_has_capability(). It's the
absence of outside consumers that most makes me reluctant, I think.
-K
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-02-14 06:49:42 CET