> -----Original Message----- > From: Philip Martin [mailto:philip.mar...@wandisco.com] > Sent: maandag 22 maart 2010 23:00 > To: Greg Stein > Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org > Subject: Re: wc-ng base/working nodes in a copied tree > > Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> writes: > > > The tree at copied-here should only have WORKING nodes. No BASE > nodes. > > > > If it has BASE nodes, then that is a bug. > > > > The tree is distinguished as a copy because of the copyfrom_* > > information at the operation root. All the children have empty > > copyfrom_* data. If you make a second copy into that tree, then that > > new subtree will have copyfrom_* at its root. > > My question was about an add rather than a second copy. Consider > > $ svn cp $url/A wc > $ svn add wc/A/Y > > Suppose $url/A contains $url/A/X. How do I distinguish between a > copied child, like wc/A/X, and an added node like wc/A/Y? Neither has > copyfrom set. How do I know that A/X inherits from it's parent A > while A/Y does not?
There is no clean way to determine this, which should be fixed by making it explicit (how is still undetermined) For the time being you can see a difference in the changed_* columns. Local additions have no (=NULL) values here, while copies have at least a changed_rev value. (This is how the entries read code currently determines whether it should set .copied or not) Bert