[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: Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:31:45 -0400

On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 14:24 -0700, Paul Charlton wrote:
> "{2007-01-02}" is inherently a set, with zero or more members.

You are describing something out of your own mental model of some
otherworldly ideal revision control system.

In Subversion, {date} is resolved to a point in time (not a day or
anything like that), which is in turn resolved to the first revision
whose timestamp is no later than that point in time. (I may have the
edge case handling wrong there; I'm not sure what happens if one or more
revisions exactly match the specified timestamp.)

That may not be the best architecture, but it is what we have. If
revisions are not linearly date-ordered, the meaning of {date} *in
Subversion* is not defined. Handling that sort of repository is not a
simple matter of replacing the binary-search implementation of {date}
resolution; it is a matter of redefining the semantics of {date} in
every command which can operate on a revision number and reworking every
API which implements those commands. In some cases, syntaxes which are
valid and well-defined now would have very different meanings or no
meaning, like "svn diff -r {date}:HEAD path".

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-09-30 02:32:40 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.