Re: scan_deletion - why?

Julian Foad <julian.foad_at_wandisco.com> writes:

> To expand: I may not be the brightest kid on the block but I find that
> with hours of effort I still can't see precisely what many of these
> functions are *trying* to do. (Obviously I can see precisely what they
> *are* doing in terms of shuffling bits around.) I am extremely
> frustrated by my slow progress in extending WC code. Something must be
> wrong: the desired behaviour is complex but not *that* complex.
>
> So I am seeking ways to make it more understandable and easier to work
> with. Basically ways to tie the embedded concepts more obviously and
> directly to the function names, inputs and outputs. To help myself, and
> because I am certain it will help others too.

We recently decided to stop eliding repos_path/revision in the base
node, I think we should stop eliding it from working nodes as well.
Then read_info would return it when available, and NULL would be a
definitive answer.

This might make some of the scan calls redundant. For example, relocate
could simply skip nodes that don't have repos_path/revision.

-- 
Philip