I'd be willing to signup to do this and send you guys the patches.
bw
Mark wrote:
>If my opinion as the administrator of several repositories in my
>organization mattered, I'd be +1 on this. Seems like it's a good idea even
>if the txn isn't being modified, just for safety's sake.
>
>Mark
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Brett Wooldridge [mailto:brettw@riseup.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 9:38 PM
>To: Philip Martin
>Cc: simon@ecnetwork.co.nz; users@subversion.tigris.org
>Subject: Re: Pre-commit transaction modification question
>
>Would it be possible for the server to pass the new checksum back to the
>client
>in the commit-response? WebDav is request/response, right? So, when the
>client recieves the commit response, it compares C' with C. 100% of the
>time
>with a non-modifying commit hook, C' will match C. In the case where they
>do not match (i.e. with a hook that augmented F), the client could
>refresh it's
>copy from the repository. This seems like it would be a sound validation
>regardless of permitting a pre-commit hook to augment the file. There is no
>transaction violation by the pre-commit hook, as the transaction is
>still open.
>There is no corruption of the repository possible, merely a client
>synchronization
>issue to resolve.
>
>If you wanted a zero impact model in the nominal case, C' doesn't even need
>to get sent in the reply if C and C' do not differ. It's presence would
>indicate
>that a difference was detected.
>
>bw
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Feb 12 18:49:09 2004