Ryan Schmidt wrote on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 at 15:01 -0500:
> On Sep 20, 2008, at 3:59 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Ryan, I think you are confusing two different meanings of the term
> > 'revision'.
>
> Wow. I think you're right, and I'm not. I don't like it when I'm not right...
> :-)
>
>
> > In skip-deltas, the term 'revision' means:
...
> > In the Subversion UI and API, the term 'revision' means[1]:
...
> >
> > I'm not an FS expert, but as far as I know these two meanings are
> > entirely unrelated.
>
> Yeah. Well this is entirely confusing.
>
> It's been hammered into me so many times that a revision is of the repository
> as a whole. Files don't have revisions; the repository does.
>
Every version control system allows one to revise a file (meaning: to
edit it), thus files have revisions (meaning: editions, versions). Only
normally we don't call this concept "revisions".
That we call something "revision" doesn't imply that repositories have
it and files don't. More generally, what we call something has zero
effect on its semantics.
> Could the skip-deltas document perhaps be persuaded not to use the term
> "revision" when it isn't used the way the term "revision" is used everywhere
> else in the Subversion universe? :-)
>
"Delta" is the difference between two "editions" (to use a neutral term)
of a file. That entire document discusses the history of one file. So
I don't see a problem.
(Also, I'm not about to go in and change a document about a core FS
algorithm that was written around 1.0.)
>
>
> I guess what this means is that you can't know at all what impact a missing
> rev file will have on the repository based on its number.
>
Agreed.
Daniel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-09-20 22:55:12 CEST