; dev@subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: svn blame not working for files which had binary mime-type in a
>> previous revision
>>
>> I'm still not clear what would go wrong.
>
> From an earlier mail (copied from below):
>>> Suppose I have a file that r
> -Original Message-
> From: MARTIN PHILIP [mailto:codematt...@ntlworld.com] On Behalf Of
> Philip Martin
> Sent: dinsdag 12 februari 2013 19:30
> To: Bert Huijben
> Cc: Ferenc Kovacs; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: svn blame not working for files which ha
me to allow switching to a more
> efficient walk in a future subversion version.
>
> Bert
>
> *From:* Philip Martin
> *Sent:* February 12, 2013 2:32 PM
> *To:* Ferenc Kovacs
> *CC:* dev@subversion.apache.org
> *Subject:* Re: svn blame not working for files which had b
2013.02.12. 14:31, "Philip Martin" ezt írta:
>
> Philip Martin writes:
>
> > Stefan Sperling writes:
> >
> >> OK, I agree that it might not be obvious to someone who doesn't know
> >> how blame actually works internally. It works by incrementally diffing
> >> all revisions that changed the file
very welcome to allow switching to a more
efficient walk in a future subversion version.
Bert
*From:* Philip Martin
*Sent:* February 12, 2013 2:32 PM
*To:* Ferenc Kovacs
*CC:* dev@subversion.apache.org
*Subject:* Re: svn blame not working for files which had binary mime-type
in a previous revision
Philip Martin writes:
> Stefan Sperling writes:
>
>> OK, I agree that it might not be obvious to someone who doesn't know
>> how blame actually works internally. It works by incrementally diffing
>> all revisions that changed the file to figure out which revision
>> contributed which line. Since
Stefan Sperling writes:
> OK, I agree that it might not be obvious to someone who doesn't know
> how blame actually works internally. It works by incrementally diffing
> all revisions that changed the file to figure out which revision
> contributed which line. Since a binary file doesn't have a n
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 07:35:07PM +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> > > I suppose we should improve Subversion's behaviour here by issuing a
> > > warning if Subversion's own binary-file detection code doesn't identify
> > > the file as binar
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 07:35:07PM +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> > I suppose we should improve Subversion's behaviour here by issuing a
> > warning if Subversion's own binary-file detection code doesn't identify
> > the file as binary when the user sets a binary mime-type.
> >
> > What do you think
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:36:09PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > The book does indeed not seem to explicitly mention 'svn blame' in this
> > context. I think that should be fixed.
>
> Filed an issue with cmpilato's consent:
> http://co
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 05:51:53PM +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > > At any revision, the entire file content could be swapped out and
> binary
> > > content be replaced with tex
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:36:09PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> The book does indeed not seem to explicitly mention 'svn blame' in this
> context. I think that should be fixed.
Filed an issue with cmpilato's consent:
http://code.google.com/p/svnbook/issues/detail?id=183
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 05:51:53PM +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > At any revision, the entire file content could be swapped out and binary
> > content be replaced with text and vice versa. In which case you'd set the
> > property in some r
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 04:44:39PM +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> > I would be ok with shipping it in 1.8, and while I think that the
> suggested
> > wording is better than the current as it suggest a solution, but
> personally
> > I would
Stefan Sperling wrote:
> Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>> It is really unintuitive to guess that blame doesn't work because the file
>> HAD a binary mimetype in the past (and from a quick test it seems that the
>> blame will be skipped even if the versions shown by blame all happened
>> after the binary mim
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 04:44:39PM +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> I would be ok with shipping it in 1.8, and while I think that the suggested
> wording is better than the current as it suggest a solution, but personally
> I would be still confused why would subversion treat my file as binary
> while
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 01:57:16PM +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to bring up an old issue here:
> > http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2089
> > I've just bumped into this, and first it was really
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 01:57:16PM +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to bring up an old issue here:
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2089
> I've just bumped into this, and first it was really confusing why would svn
> blame work with one xml file, but not with
18 matches
Mail list logo
