(sorry for terse toppost; phone)
Yeah, I was concerned about switched paths, too, but haven't figured out a
solid way to represent copy sources in an update. Maybe src_relpath is
always repos-based, and dst is negotiated.
But that doesn't translate well to move's semantics.
On Apr 9, 2012 5:03 PM, "Bert Huijben" <bert_at_qqmail.nl> wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hyrum K Wright [mailto:hyrum.wright_at_wandisco.com]
> > Sent: maandag 9 april 2012 17:26
> > To: Greg Stein
> > Cc: dev_at_subversion.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Ev2 paths (was: svn commit: r1310925 ...)
>
>
> > For repos->wc drives, my initial thought was to have the "relpath
> > root" be the working copy root, but there are scenarios where that
> > doesn't play out too well. Commit test 28 "commit from disjoint
> > working copies" is one example, though we'd still have to do
> > repos_relpath->local_relpath->local_abspath translation on the client.
>
> For future reference in this thread:
>
> Note that this architecture would also break on switched paths.
>
> All this is why the update editor starts by describing the working copy
> layout to the repository before the update.
>
> In the update/switch/diff/merge handling the layout is handled at the
> repository, but when committing libsvn_client handles the working copy
> layout.
>
> The repository also handles mixed revision situations (which might show up
> as unrelated nodes), which we can mostly ignore for layout purposes on
> commit as that would just produce an out of date error.
>
> Bert
> >
> > -Hyrum
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy
> > http://www.uberSVN.com/
>
>
Received on 2012-04-10 00:21:22 CEST