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

Re: RFC: Untangling the peg revision knot (was: A preliminary study of non-contiguous transformations in the Hilbert space of Alexandrian solutions)

From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:26:30 +0000

On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 17:52 +0100, Stefan Haller wrote:
> I think both points are valid, and both can happen in practice.
> This means that the only way to please everybody is to *try both*: first
> default to HEAD (or BASE for WCs), and if the path doesn't exist there,
> try r12 instead. This will do the right thing for people looking for a
> now-deleted branch, and it will do the right thing for people looking
> for either the new or old name of a renamed item.
> The only situation where it might give wrong results is when an item was
> renamed, and an unrelated item was later added with the same name. This
> is probably unlikely enough that I wouldn't worry too much about it.


- Julian

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-11-28 18:26:49 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.