; 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
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 the other, as the
Skipping binary file: 'reference/apc/book.xml'
wasn't re
19 matches
Mail list logo
