On 12/12/2012 03:02 PM, Lieven Govaerts wrote: > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 9:29 PM, C. Michael Pilato <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Those technical challenges aside, I've since started to doubt the wisdom of >> adding special treatment of the starting revision to this API anyway. I'll >> continue pondering other options. >> > > What about my earlier suggestion?
I considered it.
And ... then I considered it a nasty hack. Seriously, this is really not
the kind of thing that *should* be exposed through an API.
...
svn_boolean_t honor_editor_api_promises;
...
Really? :-)
It does occur to me that one way to work around this is to add an API that
seems generally useful:
svn_ra_do_checkout()
This would be Yet Another Flavor Of Update-ish Thing, but wouldn't generate
a reporter/reporter_baton pair, and would immediately begin driving the
provided editor/editor_baton. And ra_serf's implementation thereof would,
of course, use send-all mode.
svnrdump is only trying to do essentally that anyway -- a update of
${NOTHING} to ${SOME_REV}. It calls svn_ra_do_update(), uses the provided
reporter to say "I've got nothing", then finalizes the report and away she
goes. Would it not be more straightforward to offer a compact API for just
those sorts of use-cases -- the "fake update from nothing to something"
use-cases?
--
C. Michael Pilato <[email protected]>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Enterprise Cloud Development
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
