On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 06:56, Philip Martin <philip.mar...@wandisco.com> wrote: > Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> writes: > >>> Are there any circumstances today when a node will not have an URL but >>> will have a copyfrom URL? Everything seems to work if I remove the >>> copyfrom stuf from convert_to_url. >> >> entry->url "does not exist"... today, we call a function to provide a >> URL. That means we can return a URL in every possible situation, for >> some semantic of "what does that URL represent?" >> >> In general(*), entry->url means "the repository location that the node >> came from, or where it will end up after a commit". And with that >> semantic, we can *almost* always provide an answer. >> >> The only situation that I can think of is where a switched subdir has >> been rm'd so we get back svn_wc__db_status_obstructed from the wc_db >> functions. If we use the parent's information, we can guess at a URL, >> but (due to the switch) it is wrong. Conceivably, we could *ensure* >> that enough information is left in the parent stub to properly compute >> the URL. >> >> We can always compute "where will this end up?" regardless of rm'd >> subdirs. Excluded/absent/etc nodes can be derived from the parent, as >> they are never switched. >> >> In single-db, the above-noted obstruction is no longer possible, which >> means we'll always have a URL according to the above definition. > > I understand all that. My question is in the (few) cases where we > don't have an URL will we have a copyfrom URL. It seems unlikely to > me.
I will state, "in any potential case where a URL is not available... NO, we will not have a copyfrom." So: anything varying from that statement is a bug, so it can be taken as axiomatic, and we work from there. Cheers, -g
