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

Re: '@BASE' vs. 'BASE tree' -- was: Re: svn_wc__db_base_get_info() vs. svn_wc__db_read_info() ?

From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:13:44 +0000

Neels J Hofmeyr wrote:
> *Talking about commandline keywords. Nothing to do with wc-ng:*
> It looks to me like Julian thinks "@BASE" currently means "the thing I
> checked out", and I always thought the same. Julian, would you like to
> confirm / dismiss my impression of what you think?

Correct - that's what I thought. Now that you have pointed out that "cat
-r BASE" doesn't behave like that - and we don't know how many commands
do or don't - I might change my mind.

(I keep saying "what about the other commands?". 'cat' and 'diff' are
important but 'export' and 'merge (from)' and 'copy (from)' and
'proplist' and the rest need to agree too.)

> In fact, "@BASE" currently means "the to-be-committed node's history's tip".
> (See attached short test script and output from trunk.)

Would you mind extending your script to test the other commands? As I
mentioned before, 'diff' supports both ways and I don't trust 'cat'.
Because 'cat' doesn't work on directory trees, it has not had much
real-world testing for consistency with 'merge' and 'export' and so on -
people would not be so likely to notice any inconsistencies.

- Julian
Received on 2010-01-29 14:14:25 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.