On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 14:53, Hyrum K. Wright
> Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 23:20, Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_at_hyrumwright.org>
>>> For efficiency reasons, the system has converted the large body of this
>>> message into an attachment.
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: hwright_at_tigris.org
>>> To: svn_at_subversion.tigris.org
>>> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:20:25 -0800
>>> Subject: svn commit: r35440 - branches/explore-wc/subversion/libsvn_wc
>>> Author: hwright
>>> Date: Fri Jan 23 14:20:24 2009
>>> New Revision: 35440
>>> Exile non-wc-ng entries reading code to another file, so we can pare down
>>> entries.c at our leisure.
>>> This duplicates a bunch of code, but lets the new file stand on its own.
>>> After completely migrating entries.c, we can determine which bits are
>>> duplicated and refactor then.
>>> * subversion/libsvn_wc/old-and-busted.c:
>>> * subversion/libsvn_wc/entries.c
>>> (entries_accumulator, handle_start_tag, parse_entries_xml,
>>> write_entry_xml, write_entries_xml): Remove.
>>> (svn_wc__entries_write): Don't worry about writing xml entries.
>>> branches/explore-wc/subversion/libsvn_wc/old-and-busted.c (contents,
>>> props changed)
>> Why is there still reading code in entries.c? I don't understand why
>> you don't just call read_entries_old() ?
> My plan is to start paring it away as it gets replaced. Eventually, there
> won't be any of the reading code in entries.c.
You mean that you'll read from both entries *and* sqlite, filling in
wc_entry preferably from sqlite? And remove the code to fill in entry
So upgrading the format becomes: read_entries_old() followed by
write_entries() (which writes to both) ?
Am I understanding correctly? If not, then can you explain in a bit
more detail? I'm not getting it?
Received on 2009-01-24 17:58:05 CET