> -Original Message-
> From: Arwin Arni [mailto:ar...@collab.net]
> Sent: donderdag 17 maart 2011 7:43
> To: Julian Foad
> Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add --dry-run flag to "svn update" client command
>
> > Arwin Arni wrote
Arwin Arni wrote:
On Tuesday 15 March 2011 08:34 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-02, Arwin Arni wrote:
In my effort to understand the delta editor API, I took it upon myself
to try and implement the --dry-run flag for "svn update".
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2491
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Arwin Arni wrote:
> Well, the reason is that both --parents and --set-depth make permanent
> changes to the WC which will not be reported in the output at all.. If the
> user is passing these parameters, he has a fair idea of what these
> "invisible" changes are,
Arwin Arni wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 March 2011 08:34 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-03-02, Arwin Arni wrote:
> >> In my effort to understand the delta editor API, I took it upon myself
> >> to try and implement the --dry-run flag for "svn update".
> >
> >> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:15:05PM +0530, Arwin Arni wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 March 2011 08:34 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> >I see that '--parents' and '--set-depth' are not allowed in dry-run
> >mode. What is the reason behind that? Is it because they seem to be
> >difficult to implement, or you think
On Tuesday 15 March 2011 08:34 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-02, Arwin Arni wrote:
In my effort to understand the delta editor API, I took it upon myself
to try and implement the --dry-run flag for "svn update".
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2491
Hi Arwin. Ka
On Wed, 2011-03-02, Arwin Arni wrote:
> In my effort to understand the delta editor API, I took it upon myself
> to try and implement the --dry-run flag for "svn update".
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2491
Hi Arwin. Kamesh asked for technical feedback about this patch s
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 07:49:21PM +0200, 'Daniel Shahaf' wrote:
> I'd have expected this discussion to take place prior to anyone writing a
> patch.
Whether or not the order of patch submission and discussion is a problem
depends on the attitude of the person putting in the work.
Arwin already s
>> Kamesh Jayachandran wrote on Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 18:12:21 +0530:
>> > Unless there are no objection I will commit this patch post I
>> > receive a r1075802 regression fix(and testcase) from either Daniel
>> > Becroft or Arwin.
>>
>> Hold on, are you suggesting to commit the two thousand, six h
Kamesh Jayachandran wrote on Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 18:12:21 +0530:
>> Unless there are no objection I will commit this patch post I
>> receive a r1075802 regression fix(and testcase) from either Daniel
>> Becroft or Arwin.
>Hold on, are you suggesting to commit the two thousand, six hundred and
>
On 03/14/2011 01:49 PM, 'Daniel Shahaf' wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote on Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 18:36:21 +0100:
>> I haven't yet seen any good suggestion for an alternative approach.
>>
>> Dry run implies carrying out every step made during an update expect
>> making modifications to the working cop
Stefan Sperling wrote on Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 18:36:21 +0100:
> I haven't yet seen any good suggestion for an alternative approach.
>
> Dry run implies carrying out every step made during an update expect
> making modifications to the working copy. The suggestion to put dry-run
> into a separate e
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 06:22:11PM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
> It adds an insane amount of conditionals. How are you going to test this and
> maintain it?
>
> The complexity of sourcecode increases by every conditional.
The testing approach taken by Arwin seems solid enough in my book.
> I d
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@elego.de]
> Sent: maandag 14 maart 2011 17:55
> To: Daniel Shahaf
> Cc: Kamesh Jayachandran; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add --dry-run flag to "svn update" client command
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d...@daniel.shahaf.name]
> Sent: maandag 14 maart 2011 17:34
> To: Kamesh Jayachandran
> Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add --dry-run flag to "svn update" client command
>
> Kamesh
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 06:34:15PM +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Kamesh Jayachandran wrote on Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 18:12:21 +0530:
> > Unless there are no objection I will commit this patch post I
> > receive a r1075802 regression fix(and testcase) from either Daniel
> > Becroft or Arwin.
>
> Hold
Kamesh Jayachandran wrote on Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 18:12:21 +0530:
> Unless there are no objection I will commit this patch post I
> receive a r1075802 regression fix(and testcase) from either Daniel
> Becroft or Arwin.
Hold on, are you suggesting to commit the two thousand, six hundred and
sixty-t
Hi All,
I reviewed the patch and I am fine with it.
We did not hear any technical objections for this patch so far.
Bert said we can implement it via separate dry_run editor but it would
end up copying the code from subversion/libsvn_wc/update_editor.c as we
need access to wc.
Anyways we ha
[ haven't seen that yet because I wasn't CCed ]
Kamesh Jayachandran wrote on Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 20:12:43 +0530:
> On 03/02/2011 07:47 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> >Bert Huijben wrote on Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:14:24 +0100:
> >>>-Original Message-
> >>>From: Arwin Arni [mailto:ar...@collab.
Hi All,
Thanks for all the feedback.
As Stefan said, yes, this patch was an immense learning experience for
me and I wouldn't trade it for anything else.
All said and done, I hope this is not the end of this patch. It
implements exactly what the issue tracker describes and I think it would
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Mark Phippard wrote on Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 08:50:31 -0500:
>> I also do not see why clients could not use this. Presumably it sends
>> notifications just like merge --dry-run.
>>
>
> svn up -q -r BASE && svn merge --dry-run -r BASE:HEAD ./ .
On 03/02/2011 07:47 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Bert Huijben wrote on Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:14:24 +0100:
-Original Message-
From: Arwin Arni [mailto:ar...@collab.net]
Please review this and share your thoughts.
I don't think this is the way we should implement this.
Which is precisely w
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 04:17:33PM +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Bert Huijben wrote on Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:14:24 +0100:
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Arwin Arni [mailto:ar...@collab.net]
> > > Please review this and share your thoughts.
> >
> > I don't think this is the way we s
Bert Huijben wrote on Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:14:24 +0100:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Arwin Arni [mailto:ar...@collab.net]
> > Please review this and share your thoughts.
>
> I don't think this is the way we should implement this.
Which is precisely why one should contact the mailin
On Mar 2, 2011, at 7:50 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>>
>> Agreed. I'm not a fan of duplicating this functionality (and
>> maintaining them in parallel when they inevitably drift) as pa
Mark Phippard wrote on Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 08:50:31 -0500:
> I also do not see why clients could not use this. Presumably it sends
> notifications just like merge --dry-run.
>
svn up -q -r BASE && svn merge --dry-run -r BASE:HEAD ./ ./
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>>
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Arwin Arni [mailto:ar...@collab.net]
>>> Sent: woensdag 2 maart 2011 10:49
>>> To: dev@subversion.apache.org
>>> Subject: [PATCH] Add --dry-ru
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Arwin Arni [mailto:ar...@collab.net]
>> Sent: woensdag 2 maart 2011 10:49
>> To: dev@subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: [PATCH] Add --dry-run flag to "svn update" client command
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> In my
Hi Bert,
I don't think this is the way we should implement this.
This patch adds an if before every operation in the update editor that changes
the working copy. This makes the update editor harder to maintain, while you
really only need a simple editor implementation that notifies its output
> -Original Message-
> From: Arwin Arni [mailto:ar...@collab.net]
> Sent: woensdag 2 maart 2011 10:49
> To: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: [PATCH] Add --dry-run flag to "svn update" client command
>
> Hi All,
>
> In my effort to understand the delta editor API, I took it upon myse
30 matches
Mail list logo
