[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: depth of the operation vs. depth of the WC

From: Rui, Guo <timmyguo_at_mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 17:40:36 +0800

Hi Karl,
Thanks for your update. It explains the "ambient depth" now, which I was
just wondering about. It looks much better now. However, I still have some

The first is about "depth-exclude", a definition you can find in svn_types.h
while not explicitly documented. The comments say that it's reserved for
future use and does not have any client side support yet. Shouldn't this be
documented too if it is a deliberated design? (PS: I can't imagine how could
it be usefully personally. I'm already happy enough with depth-empty)
A formal description of "depth-unknown" may also be beneficial. This may
looks like this:
Depth-unknown ---------> Depth not explicitly specified. Svn client should
                        it to appropriate default depth in each
                        However, the server side treats it as depth-infinity

The second is the --changelist, which seems to honor the depth option in the
implementation of "svn update". I'd not had time to read the document about
it yet. So, does it interfere with the logic of sparse-directories?

The third is about the examples in the document. I suggest all the
not-implemented examples be retained now that we have a special section for
them. In addition, those examples should use --set-depth instead of --depth.
Just fix it :-)
According to the code, the --set-depth is not allowed to use together with
--depth. Should we have a note for it in the document?

The "affected commands" section should be removed, since all commands that
take -N or -R are affected which is a large majority. The -N option is not
always mapped as --depth=files. This makes the description in "API changes"
section not that accurate. (Minor fault ^_^)

Finally, I'm still wondering about the depth of operation (--depth option)
works. There is a paragraph in "API changes" section as quoted below:
   On the server side, most of the significant changes are in
   libsvn_repos/reporter.c. The code that receives update reports now
   receives notice of paths that have different depths from their
   parent, and of course the overall update operation has a global
   depth, which applies whenever not shadowed by some local depth for
   a given path.
<=========ENE OF QUOTE========>
What does the word "shadowed" mean? Does it mean that, if a directory in WC
is covered by the depth of operation, the depth of that local path will take
control in the operation of the subtree? This implies that if there is a
sub-directory A of infinity depth in current directory, a 'svn up
--depth=immediates' will cover the whole subtree beneath A, which is not
proper behavior form my perspective.

And the document also says this:
   Inside such a working copy, running 'svn up' by itself will update
   only what is already present, but running 'svn up OMITTED_SUBDIR'
   will cause OMITTED_SUBDIR to be brought in at depth-infinity, while
   the rest of the parent working copy remains at its previous depth.
<=========ENE OF QUOTE========>
Does this behavior apply to omitted-FILE? If id does, how could the test
"depth_immediates_bring_in_file" in depth_tests.py pass?

Thank you
Rui, Guo

Ps: I chose Timothy (Timmy) as my English name in English class and kept
using it till now. You can call me Timothy or Rui, which is my Chinese name.
Both are ok. Guo is my family name and I put it at last to follow western
convention. However, I'm called "Guo Rui" rather than "Rui Guo" in Chinese.

PS: Something about my progress. I've done with the hacking & design
document. It'll save the effort on the code later. The notes and READMEs
would be beneficial too. I've started to read some of the periphery code
these days, however, not the core libs yet.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karl Fogel [mailto:kfogel_at_red-bean.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 6:39 AM
> To: Rui, Guo
> Cc: 'David Glasser'; dev_at_subversion.tigris.org
> Subject: Re: depth of the operation vs. depth of the WC
> "Rui, Guo" <timmyguo_at_mail.ustc.edu.cn> writes:
> > Hi dave,
> > Of course I would like to contribute a patch. But I'm not very sure
> > some details of my statement yet, especially about how the depth of
> > operation works. I may need to check the source code to confirm about
> > I'll present a patch later when I'm confident enough. ^_^
> In r30205 I tried to bring that file up to date. Guo Rui ("Timmy"?),
> would you take a look and let me know if anything is still inaccurate?
> Thank you,
> -Karl
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-04-03 11:41:07 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.