On 07 Dec 2022, Evgeny Kotkov wrote:
Evgeny Kotkov <evgeny.kot...@visualsvn.com> writes:
I think that the `pristines-on-demand-on-mwf` branch is now ready
for a
merge to trunk. I could do that, assuming there are no
objections.
+1, and thank you.
Now, I haven't had time to do a real code review -- my manager hat
gets tighter every year -- so my "+1" is mainly a sign of
enthusiasm for the feature, and of general trust in our test suite
and in everyone who has worked on this.
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/branches/pristines-on-demand-on-mwf
The branch includes the following:
– Core implementation of the new mode where required pristines
are fetched
at the beginning of the operation.
– A new --store-pristine=yes/no option for `svn checkout` that is
persisted
as a working copy setting.
+1 to this UI. We can offer other gateways to this feature later,
but this is a clean & simple way to start out.
– An update for `svn info` to display the value of this new
setting.
Yay.
– A standalone test harness that tests main operations in both
--store-pristine modes and gets executed on every test run.
– A new --store-pristine=yes/no option for the test suite that
forces all
tests to run with a specific pristine mode.
Very nice.
The branch passes all tests in my Windows and Linux environments,
in both
--store-pristine=yes and =no modes.
W00t!
While here, I would like to raise a topic of incorporating a
switch from
SHA1 to a different checksum type (without known collisions) for
the new
working copy format. This topic is relevant to the
pristines-on-demand
branch, because the new "is the file modified?" check relies on
the checksum
comparison, instead of comparing the contents of working and
pristine files.
And so while I consider it to be out of the scope of the
pristines-on-demand
branch, I think that we might want to evaluate if this is
something that
should be a part of the next release.
Good point. Maybe worth a new thread?
Best regards,
-Karl
