On Thu, 2010-05-20, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47, <julianfoad_at_apache.org> wrote:
> > Author: julianfoad
> > Date: Thu May 20 15:47:19 2010
> > New Revision: 946676
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=946676&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Replace read-only uses of svn_wc__text_base_path() and similar with new
> > functions that are named to indicate this usage. The new functions simply
> > forward the call to the original functions, for now, but separating the
> > read-only uses from the writes should make it easier to migrate them to use
> > the WC-NG Pristine Store; at least it helps me to comprehend that process.
> >
> > * subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_files.h,
> > subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_files.c
> > (svn_wc__text_revert_path_to_read, svn_wc__ultimate_text_base_path,
> > svn_wc__ultimate_text_base_path_to_read): New functions.
> > (svn_wc__get_pristine_base_contents, svn_wc__get_pristine_contents): Use
> > the new functions.
> >
> > * subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_ops.c
> > (process_committed_leaf, svn_wc_get_pristine_copy_path): Use the new
> > functions.
> >
> > * subversion/libsvn_wc/diff.c
> > (get_nearest_pristine_text_as_file, report_wc_file_as_added): Use the new
> > functions.
> >
> > * subversion/libsvn_wc/update_editor.c
> > (get_pristine_base_path): Move+rename to svn_wc__ultimate_text_base_path().
> > (merge_file, close_file): Use the new functions.
> >
> > * subversion/libsvn_wc/workqueue.c
> > (verify_pristine_present, log_do_committed): Use the new functions.
>
> Most of these changes are now using svn_wc__text_base_path_to_read(),
> which is not one of these "new functions". So... either the log
> message needs tweaking because it implies something else, or you
> actually intended to use the new functions, but the code didn't get
> that far.
I did mean "Use the new functions introduced here and the one introduced
previously". I have substantially rewritten the log message.
> (and there is that "ultimate" again)
Yup. For now, when you see "ultimate base", read "WC-NG BASE_NODE
table". I'll replace it with something else as soon as we can find
something better. Or even sooner. I agree it sucks. I thought it was
clearer than "pristine base" which it replaced.
> I know you simply ported existing code over, but with your series of
> changes the (newly-named) ultimate path thingy can check for replaced
> using svn_wc__internal_is_replaced() rather than fetching an entry. It
> has the same semantics if a node is present. It may throw
> SVN_ERR_WC_PATH_NOT_FOUND, which you'd need to catch to replace that
> "entry != NULL" condition.
Excellent. Will do.
Thanks.
- Julian
Received on 2010-05-21 14:37:37 CEST