Ivan Zhakov wrote on Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 23:33:01 +0400: > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:02 PM, Daniel Shahaf <danie...@elego.de> wrote: > > Ivan Zhakov wrote on Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 21:48:39 +0400: > >> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 9:44 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> > >> wrote: > >> > On 04/10/2013 12:33 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > >> >> Right now, trunk has APIs backing an 'svnadmin info' (or 'svnlook info') > >> >> command but not a UI for them. (Some of them have unit tests.) I > >> >> think we > >> >> don't want to release with just the half-backed APIs, so we'll have to > >> >> either > >> >> revert them or add a UI for them. As far as I'm concerned reverting is > >> >> fine, > >> >> and I can continue the work on trunk and propose for backport before, > >> >> say, > >> >> beta1. > >> > > >> > Either revert or privatize them -- whatever's easiest. Now's really not > >> > the > >> > best time to be trying to introduce new UI, methinks. > >> > > >> +1 > > > > Made them conditional on -DSVN_FS_INFO. > I think it's better to make API private instead of ifdef: > 1. svn_repos.h/svn_fs.h readers might be confused with this ifdef
I'm happy to just delete the #ifdef's sections on the branch altogether. I tend to do that post-branch though. > 2. Private API still allow to use this functionality by svn 1.8 API > users with disclaimer that this may change in svn 1.9. That's unprecedented, we've never released an API "without compatibility promises". We could do that but that's a separate discussion IMO.
