On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 15:16, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 08:52:18PM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> I think just seeing every node below a workingcopy as a node in the parent
>> working copy will make things harder instead of simpler. So I would suggest
>> moving the redefinin
On 24.02.2011 11:45, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> - Maybe intra-repos externals would benifit from a new name, e.g.
> "internals" ;-)?
Symbolic links. :) Except that the name is already taken.
-- Brane
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
>> (I've appended the issue subject to the subject line.)
>>
>> Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>> I filed a new issue today (issue #3818, "fix
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 08:52:18PM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
> I think just seeing every node below a workingcopy as a node in the parent
> working copy will make things harder instead of simpler. So I would suggest
> moving the redefining of normal externals to 1.8. (But I still think we have
> t
> -Original Message-
> From: Hyrum K Wright [mailto:hy...@hyrumwright.org]
> Sent: woensdag 23 februari 2011 19:47
> To: Julian Foad; b...@ted.stsp.name; Hyrum K Wright;
> dev@subversion.apache.org
> Cc: Stefan Sperling
> Subject: Re: initial thoughts on issue #
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 12:46:44PM -0600, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > We need to preserve 1.6 semantics of how operations affect externals.
>
> Why? People have been wanting to commit across externals and working
> copies for a *long* time
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 04:13:21PM +, Julian Foad wrote:
> We need a handle that we can pass around that references the whole
> nesting of WCs (where "WC" is defined as the scope of a single wcroot).
> That could be a new thing that we can invent, but I wonder if instead it
> would be reasonabl
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 04:26:52PM +, Julian Foad wrote:
>> Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Julian Foad
>> > wrote:
>> > > Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> > >> So, ideally, we should decouple the
>> > >> concep
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 04:26:52PM +, Julian Foad wrote:
> Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Julian Foad
> > wrote:
> > > Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > >> So, ideally, we should decouple the
> > >> concept of a wcroot from the path. We could tie it to a wc_id instead.
>
Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> > Stefan Sperling wrote:
> >> So, ideally, we should decouple the
> >> concept of a wcroot from the path. We could tie it to a wc_id instead.
> >> This would allow us to use a single wc.db to manage several wcroots,
> >
On Wed, 2011-02-23, Julian Foad wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > (svn:externals ^/branches/foo baz)
> > |
> > .../foo/bar/baz
> > owcroot1
> > owcroot2
> >
> > The ambiguity arises because the local_abspath of wcroot2 is also
> > a local relpath
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> (I've appended the issue subject to the subject line.)
>
> Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> I filed a new issue today (issue #3818, "fix handling of externals in
>> wc-ng" http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_b
(I've appended the issue subject to the subject line.)
Stefan Sperling wrote:
> I filed a new issue today (issue #3818, "fix handling of externals in
> wc-ng" http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3818).
>
> I had a brief chat with sbutler at the elego
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 07:16:24AM -0600, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 7:10 AM, wrote:
> > http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3818
> >
> >
> >
> > User stsp changed the following:
> >
> > What |Old value |New value
> >
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 7:10 AM, wrote:
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3818
>
>
>
> User stsp changed the following:
>
> What |Old value |New value
>
> Iss
15 matches
Mail list logo
