Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
>> Julian Foad wrote:
>>> Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
Julian Foad wrote:
> -- a quick optimization API -- the definitely/maybe question -- like the
> existing implementations but documented properly and named
>appropriately; and
>
>
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann <
stefan.fuhrm...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Julian Foad
> wrote:
>
>> Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
>> > Julian Foad wrote:
>> >> Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
>>>
>>> >> or something very much like that. Those assumptions look lik
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> > Julian Foad wrote:
> >> Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> >>> r1568600 uncovered an inconsistency in our API usage / interpretation
> >>> making blame -g tests fail for FSX.
> >>>
> >>> The starting point is svn_fs_contents_ch
Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote:
>> Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
>>> r1568600 uncovered an inconsistency in our API usage / interpretation
>>> making blame -g tests fail for FSX.
>>>
>>> The starting point is svn_fs_contents_changed and svn_fs_props_changed.
>>> FSFS and probably BDB implement
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 10:09 PM, Bert Huijben wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I don't believe the -g implementation really works... It is a nice proof of
> concept, but it doesn't handle many merge scenarios. (It only works if you
> assume branches that are kept closely in sync).
>
That's
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> > r1568600 uncovered an inconsistency in our API usage / interpretation
> > making blame -g tests fail for FSX.
> >
> > The starting point is svn_fs_contents_changed and svn_fs_props_changed.
> > FSFS and probably BDB
A couple of clarifications.
Julian Foad wrote:
> And note that the doc string for svn_ra_get_file_revs2() explicitly says
> these
> false positives can be returned.
In fact it's not explicit, but it directs the reader to see
svn_fs_history_prev() for a definition of "interesting revisions", an
Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> r1568600 uncovered an inconsistency in our API usage / interpretation
> making blame -g tests fail for FSX.
>
> The starting point is svn_fs_contents_changed and svn_fs_props_changed.
> FSFS and probably BDB implement those as "has there been an intermittent
> change?" E.g
Hi,
I don't believe the -g implementation really works. It is a nice proof of
concept, but it doesn't handle many merge scenarios. (It only works if you
assume branches that are kept closely in sync).
But the changes you suggest look much broader than the -g mode.
I don'
9 matches
Mail list logo
