On 7/13/2010 8:35 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>
>>> When the code has beem moved around. There's a description at
>>> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.1/ch07s03.html which helps explain
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Mind you, I think if you're doing this kind of drilling back you're
>>> begging or pain.
>>
>> Yes I understand the situation where you would have to use path_at_rev
>> to get something at all (because history doesn't lead there). What
>> I don't understand is when you would ever be wrong if you used that
>> all the time instead of -r rev. Which leads to the related
>> question as to why that syntax isn't the default for commands. Is
>> it less efficient than following history backwards?
>
> There is no difference.
>
> In the "-r rev" syntax, the rev is interpreted as a peg revision.
> See http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/props.c?revision=961970&view=markup
> lines 3026 to 3092, inside function svn_wc_parse_externals_description3().
> Revisions parsed from either syntax set the same variable (item->peg_revision).
>
> The new syntax is simply more convenient because the order of URL and path
> is consistent with svn checkout.
I meant it as a more general question, not just in the context of
externals. Is there some reason not to use the path_at_rev style for every
command or document that as the preferred method? There are some
situations where it is easier to construct, like a parametrized build in
Hudson, for example.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell_at_gmail.com
Received on 2010-07-13 17:13:58 CEST