Re: svn commit: r1099657 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc: adm_ops.c wc_db.c wc_db.h

Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> writes:

> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 21:46, <gstein_at_apache.org> wrote:
>>...
>> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c Thu May  5 01:46:31 2011
>>...
>> @@ -3594,32 +3601,31 @@ svn_wc__db_op_set_changelist(svn_wc__db_
>>...
>> +  /* ### why we do filter SOME of the changelist notifications? if a row
>> +     ### is inserted, then don't we want to send a notification for it?  */
>
> This is the particular (archaeology) question that I have for you: why
> would we filter this stuff?
>
> It also kind of extends to Philip and the revert_list stuff. It does
> this kind of filtering, too.
>
> Can't we just run the notifications for every row in the table?

I don't know about changelists.

Revert notifications are skipped when the user has resolved a
text/property conflict by deleting the conflict files. When the user
resloves a conflict this way it leaves the filenames in the actual-node
row, but we treat the conflict as resolved. If the file text is also
unmodified revert is a no-op, it would be odd to get revert notification
on an unmodified file.

-- 
Philip