Branko Čibej wrote:
> I still seem to remember we have a bit missing on the multi-wc-format
> branch, but I can't remember what ... maybe we don't currently have a
> way to report the actual format (from the wc-db) through libsvn-wc to
> the client? Or has that been fixed?
Ah yes, there is n
Karl Fogel wrote:
> Does the current design involve a new per-wc flag that indicates
> something about a pristines-(present|absent) mode?
>
> [...] ideally we would record that fact solely on a
> per-file basis. [...]
That's a good question to ask, as it's a little complex.
TL;DR:
- There i
Some more notes on pristines-mode configuration.
Naming of option values: agreed that we need to choose names carefully,
avoiding ambiguity like 'mode=all'.
On the consensus that:
(1) There should be a user config (file/registry/cmdline) option to set
the desired pristines-mode that will be ap
On 2022-01-28 Evgeny Kotkov wrote:
> Julian Foad writes:
>> We could swap the scanning logic around to do the (quick) check for
>> missing pristines before deciding whether a (slower) file "stat" is
>> necessary. [...]
>
> I might be missing something, but I don't yet see how we could save a stat(
Julian Foad wrote:
> Branko Čibej wrote:
>> way to report the actual format (from the wc-db) through libsvn-wc to
>> the client?
>
> Ah yes, there is no API for that, [...]
These exist on the branch currently ("*_supported_*" are new on the branch):
- At libsvn_client (public):
svn_client_v
5 matches
Mail list logo
