RE: Consistency between 'update' and 'switch' APIs

> -----Original Message-----
> From: C. Michael Pilato [mailto:cmpilato_at_collab.net]
> Sent: maandag 8 april 2013 15:25
> To: Julian Foad
> Cc: Subversion Development
> Subject: Re: Consistency between 'update' and 'switch' APIs
>
> On 04/06/2013 03:55 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> > Julian Foad wrote:
> >
> >> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> >>> [...] So I agree, both switch and update should carry the
> >>> server-recognized meaning of 'ignore-ancestry' in both the client and
> >>> RA layers.
> >
> > In r1465292 I added the 'ignore_ancestry' flag to the RA 'update' APIs,
> > for consistency with 'switch'.
> >
> > That's enough to satisfy my symmetry cravings at the moment.
>
> Sounds good.

So now 'status' is the only exception to the rule that they all have an ignore_ancestry flag? ;-)

        Bert
Received on 2013-04-08 15:48:05 CEST