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

Re: branch tree-conflicts-notify

From: Stephen Butler <sbutler_at_elego.de>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 17:28:05 +0200

Quoting Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>:

> Neels,
> Sometimes we seem to be getting in each other's way, but generally I
> find it immensely helpful to see you doing similar things in a different
> way. Half of the things I get stuck on, you show me a way out. The bits
> I get stuck on take up most of my time, so your showing me the way
> through half of them nearly doubles my productivity!
> - Julian

I agree. At my level of expertise, I can't comment usefully on a diff
to the callbacks apparatus until I've tried to solve the problem
myself. There's some redundant programming effort, but teaching each
other directly would also take time.

Neels, I'm sorry if I've been blocking you from committing to the branch
you made. On the positive side, in r33883 I edited the update tests
so that they all pass. To get an idea of the current behavior of the
branch, just search for the relevant test expectations (containing the
string "treeconflicts='C'").

Current status: on the branch, the update-editor and its friends are
finally playing nicely with each other and printing 'C' where we want
it, at least for 'svn update'. I'll fix up the switch tests this
evening (on the branch). And have a look at the situation for merge.

Before we merge the tree-conflicts-notify branch into trunk, there are
a couple of design issues to sort out.

  * Should we print ' C' or ' C(D->M)' for a tree conflict victim?

      SB: The latter (in the style of 'svn status --conflicts') is nice,
          but the former is simpler to generate and to test.

  * How much tree conflict info do we need to pass around in an update
    editor for use by the notify_func? Candidates include the
    following datatypes:

    1. svn_boolean_t

    2. svn_wc_conflict_reason_t

    3. svn_wc_conflict_description_t

      SB: I plead for the simplest possible datatype, because then I
          make fewer mistakes. ;-)

  * If it turns out that merge's update editor requires substantial
    changes to fix tree conflict notification, can we do that in a
    second diff?

Comments, tree conflict fans?


Stephen Butler | Software Developer
elego Software Solutions GmbH
Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25 | 13355 Berlin | Germany
fon: +49 30 2345 8696 | mobile: +49 163 25 45 015
fax: +49 30 2345 8695 | http://www.elegosoft.com
Geschäftsführer: Olaf Wagner | Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin
Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 77719 | USt-IdNr: DE163214194
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-10-24 17:28:25 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.