On 18.02.2011 14:37, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
On 02/18/2011 06:42 AM, Stefan Küng wrote:
On 17.02.2011 14:19, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
<aside>
Last summer in Berlin we had a quite heated discussion about just
deprecating all of libsvn_wc APIs. I was against such a move (at
least until 2.0) in that it would leave the existing APIs public, but
any new ones private, and the whole interface in limbo. I still feel
that way, and this discussion vindicates that feeling (at least to me
:) ).
</aside>
Removing all the libsvn_wc APIs is a bad idea. For example, the new status
function returns a *lot* less information than the deprecated ones.
Stop right here. There seems to be an assumption clouding this discussion,
and that assumption is that "the new status function" is the only new status
function that can be added. It's our API -- your API -- and we can do with
it what we wish. If you need the functionality of some current libsvn_wc
function, chances are that you're not the only one who does. Fortunately,
we are both empowered and motivated to provide that functionality to you
wrapped with a thin svn_client wrapper function. Is there some technical
reason that would prevent this?
I wanted to avoid this, but if you remember we've had this discussion
before. I requested that the new status API would return information
that the deprecated one did too. And the very first answer I got was
that even "the scan if the file has been modified on disk will be removed".
I first thought this was a joke, because status means (for me at least)
the information whether a file has been modified/added/... locally - but
apparently it wasn't. So the discussion just went downhill from there:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.subversion.devel/120475/focus=120550
warning: that discussion is something I'm not proud of, and I think some
of you aren't either.
So all I'm saying is that you can decide whatever you want. I will keep
requesting things I need, but I'm trying to avoid discussions like the
one linked above. And as I said: you have to decide whether you want to
mark all functions in libsvn_wc as private or provide enough information
in *one* svn_client_ call. Otherwise the performance will get so bad it
will be unusable.
Stefan
--
___
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
\ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
/_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.net
