On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
> > As far as I can tell, the svn_fs_move() is never called (quite
> surprising).
> > Moreover, I'm unable to find any unit tests for svn_fs_move(). So it's
> not
> > worth to change the repository format for non-used feature.
>
> Agreed. But keep in mind that svn_fs_move() is marked experimental
> so we don't need to worry to much about the API.
>
> Though I'll note that svn_fs_path_change_kind_t has grown new
> move-related fields which aren't even marked as such:
>
> 1525419 stefan2 /** moved to this path in txn */
> 1525419 stefan2 svn_fs_path_change_move,
> 1525419 stefan2 /** path removed and replaced by moved path in txn */
> 1525419 stefan2 svn_fs_path_change_movereplace
>
> Those should be marked @since 1.9 at least. I've done so in r1585515.
> But I'm not sure if we can mark structure members as experimental,
> so this might need revisting...
>
> I'm most worried about the presence of a move-related option in 'svn log'
> since there doesn't seem to be any actual functionality behind it.
> I think this should be removed before release unless actual move-tracking
> features appear outside of the client's working copy. If it's needed for
> testing purposes, let's make it compile only with a special pre-processor
> flag or move development of the feature to a branch until it is complete.
>
To shortcut this branch of the discussion:
I added the move API to give others *some* means
of experimenting with move-aware merges etc.
That did not happen but I'm fine with that since I hadn't
put much effort into the implementation (so, not much waste here).
My idea has always been to get rid of these parts
as part of the 1.9 API change cleanup if those additions
remained unused.
-- Stefan^2.
Received on 2014-04-07 18:49:43 CEST