On 17.07.2012 03:59, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Jul 16, 2012 1:18 PM, "Branko Čibej" <brane_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
>> ...
>> Please describe the set of use cases you want to address, propose how
>> you think this new property can solve them, and at the very least,
>> explain how the solution will affect: a) the command-line client, b)
>> every other client, c) branching and merging, d) sparse checkouts, e)
>> externals. And explore other usage models than the one you have in mind
>> and think about how the proposed change will affect them.
> I want to make a community meta-comment here:
>
> It is fair to say "it won't work because $foo."
>
> It is not fair to say "before scratching your itch, you must satisfy *my*
> half-dozen requirements."
My problem is that right now I can't even see, from this discussion, how
exactly that itch is supposed to be scratched. Everyone else seems to
already have a specific solution in mind and are already talking about
implementation details, as if semantics and side effects were trivially
obvious.
They're not, to me. This looks like another case of having an "obviously
correct" solution in hand without having thought about the ramifications.
We've historically more or less required to have a design doc written up
before going into implementation details of major new features. Why
would waive that for this particular case?
-- Brane
--
Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
Received on 2012-07-17 10:27:49 CEST