It is also worth noting that a client can not modify the revision properties
unless the admin has provided a pre-rev-props hook which allows the change.
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Charlton [mailto:techguru_at_byiq.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2008 5:53 PM
To: 'Ben Collins-Sussman'
Cc: 'C. Michael Pilato'; 'Subversion Developers'; 'Barry Scott'; 'Branko
Čibej'; 'Blair Zajac'
Subject: RE: svn revision r0 question
my two cents --> $0.02
1) ability for client to modify svn:date property is essential for the
correct import of a repository from a different VCS --- there is not a sane
person who wants all of the dates to be the import (transaction) date rather
than the date stamp on the original VCS.
2) the back-end code assuming its ability to perform a binary search *is
broken* unless we take the time and effort to add a separate persistent
index of the svn:date properties.
best,
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: sussman_at_gmail.com [mailto:sussman_at_gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ben
Collins-Sussman
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2008 4:44 PM
To: Blair Zajac
Cc: C. Michael Pilato; Subversion Developers; Barry Scott; Branko Čibej
Subject: Re: svn revision r0 question
-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
>> SVN_ERR_FS_CORRUPT.)
>> 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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-09-29 00:21:33 CEST