subversion-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Julian Foad <julianf...@apache.org>
Subject Re: is it a valid set_path report?
Date Tue, 06 Nov 2018 17:19:32 GMT
Dmitry Pavlenko wrote:
>   set_path "" 6 infinity
>   set_path "directory" 6 infinity
>   set_path "directory/subdirectory" 5 infinity
>   finish_report
> 
> and run svn_ra_do_update3() with revision=6 to get changes of
> "directory/subdirectory" between r5 and r6.
> 
> 
> My question is whether such a report is valid or not.
> 
> 
>  I've found a citation from svn_ra.h
>    * This will *override* any previous set_path() calls made on parent
>    * paths.  @a path is relative to the URL specified in svn_ra_open4().
> but from it cannot understand if I can override parent set_path with the same 
> revision number and the same depth parameter.
> 
> When I tried to find out what SVN command line client does in a similar 
> scenario, and it always does
> 
>   set_path "" 6 infinity
>   set_path "directory/subdirectory" 5 infinity
>   finish_report
> 
> e.g. it reports a working copy in a more clever way. But I still want to 
> understand whether the first report is valid. Thanks!

Hello Dmitry. In my interpretation, the documentation implies both reports are valid. APIs
generally always allow a no-op of setting a value to its current value; only if that were
NOT allowed then I would expect it to be explicitly documented and tested.

-- 
- Julian

Mime
View raw message