On 02/17/2011 08:19 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > Without having looked at that code recently, I think this is the right > strategy. If the APIs are useful outside of Subversion, let's expose > 'em publicly, instead of making those consumers feel like second-class > citizens. > > <aside> > Last summer in Berlin we had a quite heated discussion about just > deprecating all of libsvn_wc APIs. I was against such a move (at > least until 2.0) in that it would leave the existing APIs public, but > any new ones private, and the whole interface in limbo. I still feel > that way, and this discussion vindicates that feeling (at least to me > :) ). > </aside>
Perhaps you need to stop thinking of TortoiseSVN as "outside of Subversion". We should be able to provide useful, public *libsvn_client* APIs that aren't solely consumed -- or consumed at all -- by the command-line client. libsvn_client wasn't designed to be used only by 'svn'. I concede that this mass deprecation would leave the svn_wc interface in limbo. But I also don't care, because I would bet dimes to dollars that *nobody* is using that API for something other than Subversion version control. Therefore, it's perfectly okay in my book to deprecate a svn_wc function with a pointer to its replacement in svn_client. -- C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
