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

Re: To Greg Stein

From: Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 07:35:37 -0700

Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 6:21 AM, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
>> ...
>> Can we put new stuff into libsvn_wc2 then?
> I thought about this, but decided that would be seriously painful.
> Given our versioning guidelines, we have to support the WC API
> *forever* in the 1.x series of releases. That means we'd have to
> support wc1 forever. All that software out there using wc1 would have
> to continue to function.
> I'd much prefer to get rid of the wc1 code entirely.

I think a number of us feel the same way, but while were at it, why don't we get
rid of the clunky API[1]? We can continue to ship wc1 in parallel to wc-ng, but
officially deprecate it and promise never to update or support it. If we really
wanted to physically remove the wc1 code, we could reimplement wc1 as a thin
wrapper around wc-ng. We wouldn't be breaking any compatibility guidelines
*and* we'd get to remove API cruft.

Maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill here, but those are my thoughts.


[1] svn_wc_add3() comes to mind. See this comment in libsvn_client/copy.c:
       /* Rewrite URLs recursively, remove wcprops, and mark everything
          as 'copied' -- assuming that the src and dst are from the
          same repository. (It's kind of weird that svn_wc_add() is the
          way to do this; see its doc for more about the controversy.) */

Received on 2008-08-18 16:36:01 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.