On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 13:11, <phi...@apache.org> wrote: >... > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client/copy.c Tue Mar 16 17:11:15 2010 >... > @@ -1150,15 +1149,13 @@ wc_to_repos_copy(svn_commit_info_t **com > apr_hash_t *commit_revprops; > int i; > > - /* Find the common root of all the source paths, and probe the wc. */ > + /* Find the common root of all the source paths */ > get_copy_pair_ancestors(copy_pairs, &top_src_path, NULL, NULL, pool); > - SVN_ERR(svn_wc__adm_probe_in_context(&adm_access, ctx->wc_ctx, > top_src_path, > - FALSE, -1, ctx->cancel_func, > - ctx->cancel_baton, pool)); > - > - /* The commit process uses absolute paths, so we need to open the access > - baton using absolute paths, and so we really need to use absolute > - paths everywhere. */ > + > + /* Do we need to lock the working copy? 1.6 didn't take a write > + lock, but what happens if the working copy changes during the copy > + operation? */
I'd switch this to a ### comment saying "we should lock the working copy to prevent changes while we perform the copy to the repository." But when we do that... aren't we starting a commit? and doesn't the commit lock the working copy? >... Cheers, -g
