Daniel Shahaf wrote: > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 09:55:20PM +0100, Julian Foad wrote: >> It's checked in 'svn' first, and if you call the client layer >> directly then the requirement is still there but you'll get a >> lower level error for it, [...] >> >> (The check in 'svn' appears to have been removed in trunk already, >> since branching 1.8.x, probably as part of efficiency improvements.) > > Are you talking about r1493424? That revision is nominated for backport: > > * r1493424 > Remove unnecessary check for branches ancestry from > command line client. All required checks are already performed in > libsvn_client. > Justification: > There is no reason to command line and third-party use different > codepath for ancestory checks. Simple performance fix. > > I voted +0 on that since I agree with the rationale that 'svn' should not > perform validations that libsvn_client does (that avoids code duplication).
Yes, that would be it. I've now voted for that as well. - Julian
