"Bert Huijben" <b...@qqmail.nl> writes: > This problem will never occur with a storing moved-from in BASE > (op-depth 0). (Moved-from is always stored in the op-root of the > addition, so this can never have this problem... The problem is in the > moved-to scheme)
I think the two schemes are equivalent. The implementations are different but the data stored in either scheme can be transformed into the data stored in the other without any losses. (I assume the BASE scheme is tweaked to allow tracking moves in copies by storing in the lowest op-depth normal node.) Some operations may be simpler to implement in one scheme compared to the other, and maybe one is simpler overall, but I think each scheme has operations that are easier/harder to implement. -- Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads: http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
