Greg Stein wrote on Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 22:47:43 -0400: > On Apr 23, 2012 7:20 PM, "Hyrum K Wright" <hyrum.wri...@wandisco.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 16:21, Hyrum K Wright <hyrum.wri...@wandisco.com> > wrote: > > >> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>... > > >>> Alright. It sounds like svn_ra.h has two purposes: stuff for > libsvn_client, > > >>> and stuff for all RA layers to use internally. Ugh. > > >> > > >> But the capability strings are part of the public API. > > > > > > Says who? Not server Ev2 support. The RA layer can isolate that, so it > > > should not be "part of the public API". > > > > > > Mergeinfo support? Sure. But Ev2? Nah. > > > > The entire RA interface is part of the public API. The wire protocols > > are the public interface to the server, particularly for those who > > want to write their own clients and server. These strings are part of > > that definition. > > Ah. There we go. That clinches it. > > It's too bad we don't have svn_wire.h. Right now, svn_ra serves both > purposes, so yah... I guess it makes sense to leave it there, unless we'd > like to start migrating appropriate pieces to a new header. Thoughts?
Haven't followed the thread, but we generally declared only the C API to be public, while the wire API was considered "internal". (i.e., we'll have to make it compatible to respect our 1.x-client/1.y-server promise, but we don't officially support people writing their own wire clients, etc, not through our libraries)
