On 30.09.2011 18:19, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 08:43:14PM +0200, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
This looks very interesting.
What about FSFS-specific requirements?
See assumptions above, this may require a different
data structure. But I think that noderev dependencies
will turn o
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 08:43:14PM +0200, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> >>>This looks very interesting.
> >>>
> >>>What about FSFS-specific requirements?
> >>See assumptions above, this may require a different
> >>data structure. But I think that noderev dependencies
> >>will turn out to be redundant if
On 20.09.2011 23:40, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Re-reading this to see how it affects the fs-successor-ids work (in
particular, whether it supersedes the done/planned work), one question:
Why do you refer to skip-deltas?
I haven't thought too deeply about the skip-delta issue
but that is my reasonin
Re-reading this to see how it affects the fs-successor-ids work (in
particular, whether it supersedes the done/planned work), one question:
Why do you refer to skip-deltas?
Consider the following transformation to a repository:
for noderev in FS:
noderev.props['svn:contents'] = noderev.c
On 29.08.2011 18:35, Stefan Sperling wrote:
Sorry for the late response. I have been knocked
out for a while.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 03:46:03PM +0200, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
See
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/branches/fs-successor-ids/BRANCH-README
for what this is all about.
But
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 03:46:03PM +0200, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> >See
> >http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/branches/fs-successor-ids/BRANCH-README
> >for what this is all about.
> But the assumptions in that file are actually not valid.
Which ones are invalid? Can you explain in detail
6 matches
Mail list logo
