On 12/12/2012 03:02 PM, Lieven Govaerts wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 9:29 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> 
> wrote:
>> Those technical challenges aside, I've since started to doubt the wisdom of
>> adding special treatment of the starting revision to this API anyway.  I'll
>> continue pondering other options.
>>
> 
> What about my earlier suggestion?

I considered it.

And ... then I considered it a nasty hack.  Seriously, this is really not
the kind of thing that *should* be exposed through an API.

   ...
   svn_boolean_t honor_editor_api_promises;
   ...

Really?  :-)

It does occur to me that one way to work around this is to add an API that
seems generally useful:

  svn_ra_do_checkout()

This would be Yet Another Flavor Of Update-ish Thing, but wouldn't generate
a reporter/reporter_baton pair, and would immediately begin driving the
provided editor/editor_baton.  And ra_serf's implementation thereof would,
of course, use send-all mode.

svnrdump is only trying to do essentally that anyway -- a update of
${NOTHING} to ${SOME_REV}.  It calls svn_ra_do_update(), uses the provided
reporter to say "I've got nothing", then finalizes the report and away she
goes.  Would it not be more straightforward to offer a compact API for just
those sorts of use-cases -- the "fake update from nothing to something"
use-cases?

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Enterprise Cloud Development

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to