Stefan Sperling wrote on Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 23:39:30 +0100: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 12:27:21AM +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > s...@tigris.org wrote on Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 13:10:47 -0800: > > > http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4087 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------- Additional comments from s...@tigris.org Mon Feb 13 13:10:47 > > > -0800 2012 ------- > > > r1243694 attemps to work around the reported problem that prompted me to > > > file > > > this issue. It ensures that all file externals use the same repository > > > root URL > > > as used by other files. I.e. whatever the svn:externals propery says, > > > we'll use > > > the URL to the repository that the working copy (or checkout) is using, > > > provided > > > the repository has the same UUID. > > > > How likely is this to break things? > > > > I know that UUID's are supposed to be unique. But in practice, if > > people _do_ have different repositories with the same UUID, this will > > break in odd ways. How likely is that if()'s condition to occur? > > We rely on UUIDs being unique in other cases, too, don't we? >
Such as? The design of wc-ng assumes that, but I don't know offhand how much we actually _rely_ on that in today's wc.db-per-working-copy era. > There is a real actual problem here where at least one user cannot check > out old revisions with 1.7, which they can check out with 1.6. > I would tend to give fixing this regression higher priority than people > running into problems because they have set up their UUIDs the wrong way. Sure, people who misuuid just invite trouble. But I still wonder if this is the sort of change that merits a release notes entry.
