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

Re: Copies via update -- net win or net loss? (Was: svn commit: r996914 ...)

From: Julian Foad <julian.foad_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:34:22 +0100

On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 10:58 -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 09/14/2010 10:25 AM, rhuijben_at_apache.org wrote:
> > Author: rhuijben
> > Date: Tue Sep 14 14:25:52 2010
> > New Revision: 996914
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=996914&view=rev
> > Log:
> > When mixing the two major hacks of the update editor (copy_from location
> > and file externals), we can get into an unexpected state. Update an
> > assertion to handle this state properly and slightly update the expected
> > test result.
>
> In light of our vision for the future regarding the pristine cache, and the
> seeming flakiness of the special-case code added to handle copies during
> update, should we kill that feature? I've never been convinced that it was
> truly beneficial as written anyway -- it seems to just sorta throws "what
> ifs" across the wire and then burdens the client with verification and
> handling before falling back to doing what it has always done for non-copied
> files.

The success of Subversion 1.7 and beyond depends on consistent
behaviour, reliability and our ability to understand and work with the
code. It doesn't depend on keeping strict compatibility with
undocumented half-baked quirks that are believed to sometimes do
something nice for some people's purple files.

Big +1.

- Julian
Received on 2010-09-14 17:35:09 CEST

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