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

Re: Serf and Tree Conflicts for 1.6

From: Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:48:47 -0500

On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Stephen Butler <sbutler_at_elego.de> wrote:
> Quoting Bert Huijben <B.Huijben_at_competence.biz>:
>> Hi,
>> Looking at some of the issues reported by the serf buildbot it looks
>> like the tree conflict support requires some kind of ordering in the
>> received changes that serf does not provide.
>> If this issue is really that ordering issue talked about earlier (Can
>> somebody confirm this)
> Yes, it's the ordering issue discussed by Greg Stein and others on the
> list.
>> we should discuss how to go forward with:
>> A) Relaxing the requirements of the delta editor and fixing the tree
>> conflict handling to match the new requirements.
> The fix to the tree conflict handling will be straightforward, as long
> as it's only restriction 3 that's relaxed. (In the comments in
> subversion/include/svn_delta.h).

If it is possible to do, then I think that is the direction we should
pursue. Making the consumers of the editor drive flexible enough to
handle different orderings is a good idea even if we do not relax the
requirements. That said, when this was discussed on list it seemed
like there was consensus that we should just relax the requirement.
So either way, making this work with the way Serf is driving the
editor would be a good thing.

Mark Phippard
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-11-27 16:48:59 CET

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.