On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 11:01, Daniel Näslund <dan...@longitudo.com> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 06:23:49AM -0400, Greg Stein wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 05:38, Daniel Näslund <dan...@longitudo.com> wrote: >> > I wanted to keep the current behaviour since the status code is involved >> > in so _many_ tests and rewriting all of those would cause me to loose >> > momentum. Guess, what? I've already lost that momentum. :) >> >> I suspect you mean svn/status-cmd.c rather than "status code". The >> real point is "how does 'svn status' present the values in >> svn_wc_status3_t?". You can provide wc-ng semantics in that structure, >> and then let status-cmd map those into old-style semantics and >> display. >> >> Then, in a future step, we can discuss altering the output of >> status-cmd to make more sense and to eliminate all the ugliness. > > Ok, how about creating something like this. To be called from inside the > status callback for compatibility with the testsuite (a temporary thing > of course).
Well... I think keeping the created_* values in there would be just fine. It is the crazy semantics of entry->revision that you're trying to duplicate which is bothering me. If you create a function to return a revision with those semantics... sure. Go ahead. You're not "infecting" svn_wc_status3_t with craziness in that case :-) >... > Ok, 'we want' is really 'I think we want' but you get the idea. Whatever you think. My concerns lie around the definition/semantics of svn_wc_status3_t. >... Cheers, -g
