On Apr 6, 2012 8:56 AM, "Hyrum K Wright" <hyrum.wright_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Apr 5, 2012 2:43 PM, <hwright_at_apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Author: hwright
> >> Date: Thu Apr 5 18:43:20 2012
> >> New Revision: 1310005
> >>
> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1310005&view=rev
> >> Log:
> >> On the ev2-export branch:
> >> Use an Ev2-style driver to handle repos->repos copies.
> >>
> >> Part of this commit is rather bogus, namely the bit where we still do a
> >> delete+add. This *should* be a move, and will be adjusted to such in a
> >> future commit, but the fact that it doesn't cause any tests to fail as
> >> currently implemented is somewhat strange (the Ev2 internal checks
should
> >> catch this, methinks).
> >
> > It can't.
> >
> > $ svn rm file
> > $ svn copy file_at_REV newpath
> >
> > Totally fine sequence of operations. The user *could* have moved it, but
> > that's a different story...
>
> Those aren't repos->repos operations. This chuck of code is only for
> repos->repos copy/move.
Sure, but I don't see how Ev2 can possibly know that, and throw an error
"should have used move".
Cheers,
-g
Received on 2012-04-06 15:54:24 CEST