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

Re: COMMITTED supported?

From: Jack Repenning <jrepenning_at_collab.net>
Date: 2003-08-25 19:58:09 CEST

At 11:52 PM -0500 8/24/03, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
>
>COMMITTED and BASE have been around forever. The only difference is
>whether or not you're talking about a text-base, or the specific
>repository revision.... i.e., do you hit the server or not.

So, for example, you're saying that issue 1361 ('svn cat file -r BASE
contacts repository') could be rephrased "svn cat file -r BASE does
-r COMMITTED instead"?

Sounds like "forever" is a more flexible notion here than some places:

At 9:54 PM -0500 8/24/03, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>To be honest, I'm not sure if we ever implemented the COMMITTED keyword.

As for this:

At 9:54 PM -0500 8/24/03, kfogel@collab.net (et al) wrote:
>I can't think of a circumstance
>when it would be different from BASE, but maybe I'm just not being
>creative enough?...

What about suspected working copy horkage? I can recall many
discreditable occasions in my past lives when (had I been using
Subversion at the time) I'd have been very interested in
        svn diff -rCOMMITTED:BASE

P'rhaps a post-1.0 sweep is in order, to make sure that all -r's
support both COMMITTED and BASE (and get them straight, and never
ever support COMMITTEED ;-).

-- 
-==-
Jack Repenning
CollabNet, Inc.
8000 Marina Boulevard, Suite 600
Brisbane, California 94005
o: 650.228.2562
c: 408.835-8090
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Aug 25 19:59:50 2003

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