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

Re: svn revision r0 question

From: Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman_at_red-bean.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:43:54 -0500

-r {date} is already broken 5 ways to Sunday.... it assumes that the
svn:date stamps are in time order, so it can do a binary search. This
is definitely not a guarantee, as in the case of people merging
projects' histories together via 'svnadmin load'. It's one of the
oldest bugs in the bugtracker. :-)

On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Blair Zajac <blair_at_orcaware.com> wrote:
> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> No, the docs are admittedly flawed in this way. If you use -r {date} and
>> that code has to query a revision that has no datestamp, it raises
>> SVN_ERR_FS_GENERAL to say that it was asked to lookup a date on a revision
>> that doesn't have one. (But note that it doesn't raise
>> And the book doesn't mention this either (but as you might have seen, I
>> just sent mail off to svnbook-dev@ to remind us to fix that).
> Well, that's still broken. If you allow deleting it, then it should skip
> past the revision or make some assumptions about the non-existence of the
> date, not throw an error. Don't allow -r {date} to return it or something.
> Blair

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-09-28 01:44:08 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.