On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 12:22 -0500, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 11:01 AM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
> >
> >> I'll bet you a can of Starkist Solid White Albacore Tuna that you'll get
> >
> > Wha? That's like betting a beer connoisseur a bottle of Miller Lite. :-)
>
> Yah. That was sorta the intent. ;-)
>
> > Beyond the parsing part, I guess the code would have to do more than
> > simply pretend the person had typed "!svn/bc/REV/path" -- it would
> > actually have to make an fs call to follow history to the peg. Not a
> > huge deal.
>
> Nah. It can simply use the svn_repos_trace_node_locations() API.
>
> The only big deal is that we won't want to release the peg-less version of
> your protocol change in 1.6 because it presents a compatibility problem with
> the now-planned peg-ful version. So, are you committing to the work, or
> will you be reverting your recent trunk change?
It would be good to specify the semantics before committing to
supporting this syntax. I'm pretty sure I know what it means for (r <=
p) but for (r > p) is it going to mean "follow forward if and when we
have move/rename support, iff there is an unambiguous answer, else an
error" or "use the heuristic that svn uses today" or "always an error"?
- Julian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-11-05 18:34:46 CET