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

Re: log -g performance

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_red-bean.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:57:59 -0400

Marc Strapetz <marc.strapetz_at_syntevo.com> writes:
>> One of the things I was thinking was that it would be nice (assuming
>> it is not expensive), if a normal svn log could just return some kind
>> of boolean for each revision that indicates if the revision was the
>> commit of a merge.
> That would be helpful as well. The suggested depth parameter requires
> a protocol change from client to server and in case of depth=0
> probably also from server to client. How about this mergeinfo marker
> -- can it be introduced safely without breaking older clients?
> Can we get this topic into the issue tracker?

Let's discuss it here first, and if we decide to do it, then file an

So when a commit does both (that is, commits the result of a merge or
merges, *and* includes new changes), should the marker be set? What's
the use case? (Quoted context didn't say.)


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-06-24 20:58:41 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.