Mailing-List: contact dev-help@subversion.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Subject: Re: Subversion 1.10 RC1?
To: Evgeny Kotkov <evgeny.kotkov@visualsvn.com>
Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
References: <277282b9-aebf-6156-8244-d50c70e9f3af@apache.org>
 <CAP_GPNiKvONSN6ZBPO0tx3DFyAiRv9+5OkzNZ8+CeV+AysYyYA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Julian Foad <julianfoad@apache.org>
Message-ID: <e4cef34b-edd3-e99b-7cab-06e0e1ca2f8c@apache.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:16:18 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAP_GPNiKvONSN6ZBPO0tx3DFyAiRv9+5OkzNZ8+CeV+AysYyYA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
archived-at: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 16:16:22 -0000

Re. shelving...

Evgeny Kotkov wrote:
> Julian Foad <julianfoad@apache.org> writes:
>>    * shelving v1: is isolated -- doesn't affect anything else; is limited but
>> already useful; will be changed in the next release so APIs are marked
>> "SVN_EXPERIMENTAL"; changes shelved by this release could be detected and
>> 'upgraded' by a future release; should the CLI commands be marked
>> "experimental" in the help, too (Johan thinks yes)?
> 
> One comment that I have is that marking the new commands experimental
> might not prevent the users from using them on a regular basis (e.g., for
> those who don't read help or use a GUI client like TSVN that might not
> have the "experimental" labels).
> 
> Which, in turn, could mean that if the future format changes, we would
> have to convert the data stored in the patch files to avoid a data loss
> for such users.

I agree we need to take care of data stored by the user using this 
version. As the patches stored by this version are simple patch files 
compatible with 'svn patch', we would not need to be able to upgrade 
them to a new format. It would be possible to keep support for them in 
the existing format. In the worst case, the user can recover them 
manually and use 'svn patch'.

> Also, out of curiosity, are there any current plans to support binary changes
> for the shelves?
> 
> As far as I recall, there has been a mention of using diff --git for these
> purposes, and I also saw a recent commit where you added a test for diff
> --git, which might be related to this topic :)

Yes, absolutely, binary support is high on my priority list, and yes I'm 
considering git-diff format.

Thanks!

- Julian