Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-22 Thread Julian Foad
Philip Martin wrote: > Julian Foad writes: >>  That's on svn_fs_lock_many() [...] >>  where lock_callback is called even if it is null, as far as I can tell. > > I'd fix it but my password reset hasn't worked yet :-( Philip committed the fix in r1587514. - Julian

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-14 Thread Philip Martin
Julian Foad writes: > Hi Philip. Amidst the rest of the discussion perhaps you missed this: > > Julian Foad wrote: >> Index: subversion/include/svn_fs.h >> === >>   * For each path in @a targets @a lock_callback will be invoked >>  

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-14 Thread Julian Foad
Hi Philip. Amidst the rest of the discussion perhaps you missed this: Julian Foad wrote: > Index: subversion/include/svn_fs.h > === >   * For each path in @a targets @a lock_callback will be invoked >   * passing @a lock_baton and the

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-08 Thread Julian Foad
Philip Martin wrote: > Julian Foad writes: > >> For example: The reader may not be thinking immediately about the two >> callers named here, having come here from one of the (at the time of >> writing) six other direct callers. Two of those don't have a >> result_pool as such and don't clear

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-08 Thread Philip Martin
Julian Foad writes: > For example: The reader may not be thinking immediately about the two > callers named here, having come here from one of the (at the time of > writing) six other direct callers. Two of those don't have a > result_pool as such and don't clear the error as such. There are onl

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-08 Thread Julian Foad
Hi Philip. Thanks for the other fixes and doc tweaks you committed related to this. Philip Martin wrote: > Julian Foad writes: >> Hi Philip. I hope you don't mind, I've made a few more review comments >> and suggestions, in the form of a patch. > > It would be better if your mail program didn

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-07 Thread Philip Martin
Philip Martin writes: >> + *   ### Implementation here requires lock_callback is non-null. > > The implementation does > > if (!cb_err && lock_callback) > cb_err = lock_callback(...) > > which allows lock_callback to be NULL. Ah! You were referring to the wrapping callback in libsvn

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-07 Thread Philip Martin
Julian Foad writes: > Hi Philip. I hope you don't mind, I've made a few more review comments > and suggestions, in the form of a patch. It would be better if your mail program didn't convert tabs to hard spaces, as it is I can't apply the patch. > +/** ### Document here not what the callers wil

Review of lock-many API

2014-04-07 Thread Julian Foad
Hi Philip. I hope you don't mind, I've made a few more review comments and suggestions, in the form of a patch. [[[ Index: subversion/include/svn_fs.h === --- subversion/include/svn_fs.h    (revision 1585474) +++ subversion/include/sv

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-07 Thread Julian Foad
Philip Martin wrote: > Julian Foad writes: >> Imagine the caller is an svn GUI that has an offline mode in which the >> user can queue up lock requests, and the software will send them to >> the server when it's back on line. Does the GUI's back end need to run >> through the queued lock requests

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-07 Thread Philip Martin
Julian Foad writes: > Imagine the caller is an svn GUI that has an offline mode in which the > user can queue up lock requests, and the software will send them to > the server when it's back on line. Does the GUI's back end need to run > through the queued lock requests and re-group them into bat

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-03 Thread Julian Foad
Hi Philip. Philip Martin wrote: > Julian Foad writes: >> Index: subversion/svnserve/serve.c >> === >> -  /* The client expects results in the same order as paths were supplied. >> */ >> +  /* Send the results. The client expect

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-04-03 Thread Julian Foad
Hi Philip. Thanks for the responses. (I see you've changed the API implementation to a callback pattern now.) Philip Martin wrote: > Julian Foad writes: >> The 'comment' parameter to svn_fs_lock2 should be a member of the >> 'target' struct, since it is inherently a per-target attribute. Of >> c

Re: Review of lock-many API

2014-03-28 Thread Philip Martin
Julian Foad writes: > Philip Martin wrote: >> Julian Foad writes:   URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1577280   * subversion/include/svn_fs.h     (svn_fs_lock_target_t, svn_fs_lock_result_t,      svn_fs_lock2, svn_fs_unlock2): new.   * subversion/include/svn_repos.h     (s

Re: Review of lock-many API [was: svn commit: r1577280 [1/3] ...]

2014-03-27 Thread Julian Foad
I (Julian Foad) wrote: > In principle, the 'is_dav_comment' and 'expiration_date' > parameters should similarly be per target, Not "should", but rather "could be argued, at some pedantic level". > but that makes less sense in practice > as they're only used for generic DAV clients via mod_dav_s

Review of lock-many API [was: svn commit: r1577280 [1/3] ...]

2014-03-27 Thread Julian Foad
Philip Martin wrote: > Julian Foad writes: >>>  URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1577280 >>>  * subversion/include/svn_fs.h >>>    (svn_fs_lock_target_t, svn_fs_lock_result_t, >>>     svn_fs_lock2, svn_fs_unlock2): new. >>> >>>  * subversion/include/svn_repos.h >>>    (svn_repos_fs_lock2, svn_repos_fs_