Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 21:46, <gst...@apache.org> wrote: >>... >> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c Thu May 5 01:46:31 2011 >>... >> @@ -3594,32 +3601,31 @@ svn_wc__db_op_set_changelist(svn_wc__db_ >>... >> + /* ### why we do filter SOME of the changelist notifications? if a row >> + ### is inserted, then don't we want to send a notification for it? */ > > This is the particular (archaeology) question that I have for you: why > would we filter this stuff? > > It also kind of extends to Philip and the revert_list stuff. It does > this kind of filtering, too. > > Can't we just run the notifications for every row in the table?
I don't know about changelists. Revert notifications are skipped when the user has resolved a text/property conflict by deleting the conflict files. When the user resloves a conflict this way it leaves the filenames in the actual-node row, but we treat the conflict as resolved. If the file text is also unmodified revert is a no-op, it would be odd to get revert notification on an unmodified file. -- Philip
