Greg Stein wrote on Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 17:06:54 -0500:
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 15:55, Daniel Shahaf <danielsh_at_elego.de> wrote:
> > Greg Stein wrote on Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 15:49:10 -0500:
> >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 15:44, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
> >> > On 02/06/2012 03:41 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> >> >> That is certainly an easier approach. "You use the old interface?
> >> >> Fine. You won't get base checksum verification cuz we'll always pass
> >> >> NULL." ... that seems like a fine position to take.
> >> >
> >> > This might be a fine position to take for some third-party consumer of the
> >> > APIs, but I hope you aren't advocating that we toss out such a core data
> >> > integrity check within Subversion itself. Are you?
> >>
> >> Theoretically, we'll be converted over to Ev2 and the compatibility
> >> shim will not be used in our product. Only third-parties who choose to
> >> stick to the old Ev1 (delta editor) interfaces will lose the integrity
> >> check.
> >>
> >
> > And Subversion 1.7 clients.
>
> Are you talking about 'svn', or something like TortoiseSVN? The former
> will use Ev2, so the shim won't be used. The latter will not get the
> additional integrity check if it continues to use the Ev1 interfaces.
I am talking about svn 1.7.0 --- how will it use Ev2?
>
> Cheers,
> -g
Received on 2012-02-06 23:14:33 CET