On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 12:33:31PM -0400, Karl Fogel wrote:
> Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> writes:
> > So Julian's approach to storing property conflicts data in the auth
> > is consistent with what we have already done on the tree conflicts
> > branch.
> >
> > While maintaining consistency between the way text conflicts and
> > other types of conflicts are handled is certainly desirable, I don't
> > think it's viable. The way we currently deal with text conflicts is fine.
> > But it is also much simpler than how we want to deal with tree and property
> > conflicts. And the way our current trunk code is dealing with either
> > of those is, well, suboptimal.
>
> *nod* Okay, that all sounds reasonable to me. (Assuming you mean
> "admin area" where you write "auth area").
Your assumption is correct, I mixed that up, sorry.
Don't worry, no one wants to store conflict meta data in the
authentication cache :)
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-07-24 20:45:15 CEST