On 03/20/2013 09:45 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Branko Čibej wrote:
>> On 20.03.2013 04:47, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>> See attached patch. Any objections to doing that (and similar
>>> changes to the rest of the code)?
>> Must we do this just before branching? I suppose it's a benign change,
>> but it /is/ a lot of code churn.
> When I tried doing this, I found I had to include <svn_hash.h> in every C
> file that uses them, which is fairly close to every C file in the
> project, and that made me think it would be better if we moved the
> definitions into <svn_types.h> which is our "global" header file.
Since svn_hash.h includes svn_types.h, won't this be more like replacing the
inclusion of the latter with the inclusion of the former?
> Personally I don't mind the code churn and, for the purposes of
> back-porting changes to 1.8.x, there is an advantage to doing it before
> branching if we're going to do it at all (which I think we are).
Speaking generally, I do mind the churn -- but this is, as was pointed out,
a pretty benign change that requires no specialized domain knowledge to
review. I think it's "safe enough" to go ahead and pull the trigger.
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Enterprise Cloud Development
Received on 2013-03-20 15:24:13 CET