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

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 11:44 PM, Rui, Guo <timmyguo_at_mail.ustc.edu.cn> wrote:
> > > 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)
> >
>
> > It seems someone has documented it now :-). Are you looking at recent
> > code?
>
> If you are referring to the comments in the svn_types.h, yes I have noticed
> this. What I was trying to say is that, why do we have to introduce another
> depth-exclude? Solely for flexibility or expandability?

IMHO, "check out this directory except for this subdirectory" is a
reasonable request to make. And it's very easy to implement on the
server side; the client side suffers from the general "anything
involving the wc is painful" symptom.

--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