On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 01:55:32PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote: > There's a world of difference here. The former is an error that prevents > you from using the working copy. The latter case doesn't prevent anything.
This discussion is about a performance issue, not a behavioural one. > BTW, don't you find it a bit strange to get error (or warning) messages > from our libraries that refer to the implementation of our command-line > client? That doesn't sound at all like what Johan is asking for. If status information returned by the library to clients said "the timestamp of this node doesn't match the recorded one" clients could then deal with this in any manner they wished.
