> -----Original Message-----
> From: 'Stefan Sperling' [mailto:stsp_at_elego.de]
> Sent: dinsdag 2 februari 2010 21:21
> To: Bert Huijben
> Cc: 'Subversion Development'
> Subject: Re: two questions (and a proposed patch) regarding svn:ignore
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:12:42PM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
> > Yes..
> > It can also skip libsvn_client and use libsvn_wc or (for what it's
> > worth) edit the entries file directly, but that is not the point here..
> > We have a
> > versioning policy on our api and hundreds of existing libsvn_client
> > api users.
> > An application compiled against Subversion 1.0 should still work when
> > the library it is linked to is upgraded to 1.7.0... We expect the same
> > for apr and all the libraries we use.
> OK, fair point. Even if the behaviour wasn't intended, we have to live
> now, and keep providing it.
> > If you want to break these users we have to go to Subversion 2.0.
> > I know about 3 documented cases where we had to break compatibility
> > for specific corner cases with libsvn_wc, but if possible we try to
> > avoid breaking existing public apis at all cost.
> > In this libsvn_client_addX() case it would be adding an extra boolean
> > to pass to the new svn_client_addX() function... And passing the right
> > value from the wrapper in deprecated.c.
> Right, no problem. So we add svn_client_add5, with boolean
> 'no_global_ignores' and 'no_svn_ignores' (better name anyone?).
> The old API would be interpreted as always passing no_svn_ignores = FALSE,
> and setting no_global_ignores based on svn_client_add4's no_ignore
> parameter. Would that be OK?
Not sure if it is better but something like 'skip_ignored_files',
'skip_ignores'? (Better names welcome ;-)
Received on 2010-02-02 21:43:41 CET