On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 21:25, Neels J Hofmeyr <ne...@elego.de> wrote: > Wait a minute, I just read this again: > > notes/wc-ng/design > [[[ > * BASE: The tree of nodes from the repository, against which local changes > are made. Also known as "pristine". Each node is as it was in the > repository at a particular revision and URL, as recorded per node in > the WC metadata. A directory node in the BASE tree knows something > about the children it had in the repository (### details?), but its set > of children in the WC is independent of that. In a node or tree > [---> HERE ^^^^^^^ ] > scheduled for replacement the BASE is the pristine version of the > to-be-added node or tree, not of the deleted one. For a node that is > scheduled for add without history, there is no BASE node. > ]]] > > Er, what? I thought that was different in the BASE *tree*. Is this really > true? Then all I said about the BASE tree is probably wrong.
What do you mean "this". Be explicit... I don't see anything wrong here. > - Where is the information for a 'revert' in case of (a) an add and of (b) a > replace-with-history (going to be) in wc-ng? Still in the BASE tree. An 'add' just creates WORKING nodes. A "replace-with-history" is a fucked-up name. Never ever say "with-history". I say there is no such thing. It is a *copy*. Plain and simple. So you're talking about a 'delete' followed by a 'copy' into the same location. Information for the revert is still sitting in the BASE tree. > - In the same line, does base_shadowed == TRUE mean that the BASE tree now > reflects the to-be-committed node's history and no longer "what I checked > out"? BASE is always what you checked out. I think what might be throwing you off is that the repository has a set of children X. In the working copy, you could have a *subset* of those children named Y because you've *excluded* some children. Now... all that said. Let look at the phrase "the BASE is the pristine version of the to-be-added node or tree," ... that's just wrong. The BASE is untouched by adds, deletes, etc. As Julian mentioned, there is some stuff in wc-ng/design that appears to be descriptive of wc-1 terms rather than what we've come to concretely as wc-ng concepts. Cheers, -g
