[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: AW: 1.9 issues

From: Branko Čibej <brane_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 09:03:32 +0100

On 28.01.2014 08:14, Markus Schaber wrote:
> SVNKit actively supports this way of working, at least according to their homepage: "Arbitrary object model versioning: SVNKit provides API to version virtually any object model with standard Subversion repository; there is no need to keep anything in the filesystem.". So there seems to be a "market" for that mode of operation.

That's just another way of saying they support the SVNKit equivalent RA
API. And as I pointed out, svn_mtcc is just another wrapper around that
same API. (That doesn't mean its useless, of course).

> To be honest, I don't care that much in which library those functions are, but I think having them in their own library may be a little bit of overkill.

The ideas is to separate our core functionality from extensions built on
top of it, such as svnmucc and svnversion. I would like /everything/ of
that sort to go into a new library. As long as we have separate libs for
separate API layers, we should be consistent; otherwise we may as well
stuff svn_wc, svn_client and svn_ra into one library, and svn_repos and
svn_fs into another.

-- Brane

Branko Čibej | Director of Subversion
WANdisco // Non-Stop Data
e. brane_at_wandisco.com
Received on 2014-01-28 09:04:11 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.