On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 12:04 -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 08:53, Julian Foad <julian.foad_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> >...
> > I was trying to do two things: avoid using plain "base" because in
> > traditional usage (which is still widespread) it means "WORKING_NODE if
> > present else BASE_NODE"; and also identify that it refers to the *text*
> > of the BASE_NODE rather than, say, its properties.
> >
> > Thinking about this now, "text" would be better than "pristine", so I
>
> hmm? "pristine" has a specific meaning in wc_db. Are you proposing to
> change that? Or is this somehow a different concept?
"Pristine" has a specific English meaning too, which is more general
than the WC-NG meaning, and I'm trying to balance the two.
> > propose "get_base_text_{checksum,path}", or even
> > "get_base_node_text_{checksum,path}".
> >
> > Actually I intend to replace these local functions with one or more
> > library-scope functions, perhaps like
> >
> > svn_wc__get_base_node_text_info(OUT abspath,
> > OUT sha1_checksum,
> > OUT md5_checksum,
> > OUT file_size,
> > IN db, local_abspath, pools);
> >
> > where the OUT params are optional outputs. Any comments on that?
>
> What's the abspath for? The location in the pristine database?
Yes
> We
> really don't want to throw that around the library. That got us into
> trouble, and we don't want to go back there It is best to stick to
> readonly streams.
It's not optional, within libsvn_wc, at least not yet. We can work on
getting rid of it but we're not there yet.
> What's the "file_size" ... is that "translated_size"? If so, then use
> that name. (stop changing names!)
Not sure yet, actually. If it is going to be 'translated_size' then
I'll call it 'translated_size'. But maybe we'll want pristine text
size. Or both.
> If the translated_size is in this API, then why not last_mod_time?
>
> How is this function different from svn_wc__db_base_get_info() ? Why
> not just use that function?
Good questions. Conceptually it sounds like it makes sense to do so.
/me hesitates to embark on adding more params to that function.
Thanks for the thoughts.
- Julian
Received on 2010-05-13 19:22:30 CEST