Greg Stein wrote on Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 17:06:54 -0500: > On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 15:55, Daniel Shahaf <danie...@elego.de> wrote: > > Greg Stein wrote on Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 15:49:10 -0500: > >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 15:44, C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> > >> wrote: > >> > On 02/06/2012 03:41 PM, Greg Stein wrote: > >> >> That is certainly an easier approach. "You use the old interface? > >> >> Fine. You won't get base checksum verification cuz we'll always pass > >> >> NULL." ... that seems like a fine position to take. > >> > > >> > This might be a fine position to take for some third-party consumer of > >> > the > >> > APIs, but I hope you aren't advocating that we toss out such a core data > >> > integrity check within Subversion itself. Are you? > >> > >> Theoretically, we'll be converted over to Ev2 and the compatibility > >> shim will not be used in our product. Only third-parties who choose to > >> stick to the old Ev1 (delta editor) interfaces will lose the integrity > >> check. > >> > > > > And Subversion 1.7 clients. > > Are you talking about 'svn', or something like TortoiseSVN? The former > will use Ev2, so the shim won't be used. The latter will not get the > additional integrity check if it continues to use the Ev1 interfaces.
I am talking about svn 1.7.0 --- how will it use Ev2? > > Cheers, > -g
