Hi Julian,
On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 12:17 +, Julian Foad wrote:
> I can't look into this in detail, but I have two thoughts:
>
> 1. Ideally, I would expect the structure of the diff code to be
> something like:
>
> libsvn_client:
> call libsvn_wc to get the WC file;
> call libsvn_ra t
On Fri, 2011-01-07, Prabhu Gnana Sundar wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-01-06 at 14:22 +, Julian Foad wrote:
> > The tabular format is good but it would be easier to follow if instead
> > of "A" or "B" or "C" etc. you write "Shown as diff against source" or
> > "Shown as all lines added".
>
> Thank you
On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 15:45 +0530, Prabhu Gnana Sundar wrote:
> Hi Julian,
>
> On Thu, 2011-01-06 at 16:25 +0530, Prabhu Gnana Sundar wrote:
>
> > > Isn't it a layering violation for libsvn_wc to know about libsvn_ra?
> > > Maybe this needs to use callbacks or something, so that all the RA
> > >
Hi Julian,
On Thu, 2011-01-06 at 16:25 +0530, Prabhu Gnana Sundar wrote:
> > Isn't it a layering violation for libsvn_wc to know about libsvn_ra?
> > Maybe this needs to use callbacks or something, so that all the RA
> > knowledge remains in libsvn_client.
> >
>
> What you say is correct. :)
>
Hi Julian,
On Thu, 2011-01-06 at 14:22 +, Julian Foad wrote:
> > Please let me know if I am not clear at any point.
>
> The tabular format is good but it would be easier to follow if instead
> of "A" or "B" or "C" etc. you write "Shown as diff against source" or
> "Shown as all lines added".
On Thu, 2011-01-06, Prabhu Gnana Sundar wrote:
> I made a tabular summary of the change that this patch would make.
> Since it displayed weirdly in the mail body I have attached it as a
> file(diff-explanation-table.txt) with this mail.
>
> I have also attached the experiment carried out, in anot
Hi Julian,
On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 11:41 +, Julian Foad wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-12-30, Prabhu Gnana Sundar wrote:
> [...]
>
> I like this change, in principle.
>
Thank you :)
> For example, maybe some tables
> something like this would be a good way to summarize the changes:
>
> Type of di
On Thu, 2010-12-30, Prabhu Gnana Sundar wrote:
[...]
> After a few discussions about the inconsistent behaviour of 'svn diff'
> in different scenarios, Kamesh suggested that let 'svn diff' be done
> against the copy-source by default, making use of the copyfrom info.
>
> Now this patch would do 'd
Prabhu,
I am fine with this patch.
I would wait till next Monday(10th Jan) to get community's opinion on
this before committing this.
With regards
Kamesh Jayachandran
On 12/30/2010 08:37 PM, Prabhu Gnana Sundar wrote:
Hi all,
This patch is a follow up to the patch that I gave last month
9 matches
Mail list logo
