Re: svn_wc__db_base_get_info() vs. svn_wc__db_read_info() ?

Greg Stein wrote:
> base_get_info returns information about the BASE tree.
>
> read_info returns information about the WORKING tree, or if a
> specified node is not present in WORKING, then info from the BASE
> tree.

Nice, thanks for the clear info.

> and recall that BASE == what you checked out from the repository.
> WORKING corresponds to added/removed/copied/moved nodes. For nodes in

Yes, I learnt this from Bert last week, and also that the current *@BASE*
commandline keyword refers to the "copy_from" of the *WORKING* tree for all
the add-with-history schedules :)

BTW, is that svn_wc__db_pristine? WORKING's BASE? :P

> the WORKING tree, revision will always be SVN_INVALID_REVNUM, and the
> repos_relpath/root_url will be NULL.

Hadn't seen it that clear yet.

But read_info fills up the revision, repos_relpath and root_url from the
BASE tree even when a node is present in the WORKING tree, right?
(read_info's comment sounds like it:
" * The information returned comes from the BASE tree, as possibly modified
  * by the WORKING and ACTUAL trees. ")

So when read_info returns a non-"empty" revision, repos_relpath or root_url,
then these values have definitely come from the BASE tree?
Does that mean the two calls that only ask status, revision, repos_relpath
and root_url, passing NULL for all other return-parameters, are in fact
perfectly identical?

> err = svn_wc__db_base_get_info(&status, NULL,
> &revision,
> &repos_relpath,
> &repos_root_url,
> NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL,
> NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL,
> eb->db,
> local_abspath,
> result_pool,
> scratch_pool);

> SVN_ERR(svn_wc__db_read_info(&status, NULL,
> &revision,
> &repos_relpath,
> &repos_root_url,
> NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL,
> NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL,
> NULL, NULL, NULL,
> eb->db, local_abspath,
> result_pool, scratch_pool))

Thanks!
~Neels