> -----Original Message----- > From: Julian Foad [mailto:julianf...@btopenworld.com] > Sent: maandag 23 juni 2014 10:03 > To: Markus Schaber > Cc: Subversion Dev (dev@subversion.apache.org) > Subject: Issue #4162: make svn status fix timestamp mismatches in meta- > data > > Markus Schaber wrote (in thread "controversial issues in the tracker"): > > > * 4162 make svn status fix timestamp mismatches in meta-data > > http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4162 > > > > The controversial issue here is whether it is a good idea to have "svn > > status" modify the meta data - until now, it intentionally only has a > > read-only lock on the working copy, and changing that may have > compatibility > > side effects. > > > > Currently, correcting the metadata for files with updated timestamps (but > > unmodified content) is only available as a side-effect of other commands > > (update, cleanup, etc.) which all have other side-effects. > > > > Thus, alternative solutions may be to pass an option to status which > explicitly > > allows modification of the meta data, or create a command (or option to > svn > > cleanup) which only fixes the timestamps without other side effects. > > > > My personal suggestion is to add a flag to svn status. > > I'm with Stefan Sperling: the user doesn't want to know or care about this. > It's just caching. We don't need another flag or command or explicit action to > control it. Subversion should simply update the metadata.
Changing the recorded timestamps would require obtaining a write lock while performing a status walk... which is a breaking change for any client that wants to do things concurrently. -1 on 'just doing it' There is a good reason the current code only updates timestamps when it has a write lock. Otherwise it would break concurrent operations. Note that 1.9 already supports an api to fix timestamps at the api level: you can now run cleanup without breaking the write locks. Bert