On 12/18/2010 04:29 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > [email protected] wrote on Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 23:10:10 -0000:
[...]
>> * subversion/libsvn_ra/util.c
>> (is_atomicity_error): Moved here from svnsync/main.c.
>> (svn_ra__release_operational_lock): New, abstracted from
>> svnsync/main.c:maybe_unlock().
>> (svn_ra__get_operational_lock): New, abstracted from
>> svnsync/main.c:get_lock().
>>
>
> Not exactly the same as svnsync's versions, since you added the
> 'stolen_lock_p' parameter. (and the log message doesn't mention that)
I'm not claiming they are the same. I'm claiming that essentially logic
therein was culled from the svnsync functions. I note that they are "New",
and it's not our practice to list the parameters of new functions. :-)
If it was a simple function move, I would use the syntax as above with
is_atomicity_error -- "Move here from..." or "Was ...".
>> + if (is_atomicity_error(err))
>> + return svn_error_quick_wrap(err,
>> + _("Lock was stolen; unable to remove
>> it"));
>
> s/was stolen/was stolen by '%s'/ ?
Ah yes, good suggestion. r1051157.
OOH! I just noticed a bug, though -- when I switched to using
svn_string_compare() (instead of strcmp()ing ->data elements) I didn't
switch the boolean sense. Will fix.
--
C. Michael Pilato <[email protected]>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
