On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Jan Nijtmans <jan.nijtm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> 2015-01-13 21:33 GMT+01:00 Baruch Burstein <bmburst...@gmail.com>: >> > After a few days of fighting with this, I realized that handling >> changes to >> > a tag adds a LOT of complexity to the code, and will still probably >> never be >> > 100% accurate (it is somewhat of a heuristic guess as to when a tag is >> > changed). Is it worth the extra effort/complexity? >> >> I would say, it is certainly not of high-prio to get this right. >> > > Just FYI: some of the svn devs hang out on the sqlite list - maybe they > can get you more information on how they have converted older SVN repos to > the newer (sqlite-based) storage. Certainly they had to deal with this > problem. > They wont have had any problem, since all that changed is the backing store. The concepts are still svn, which treats "tags" as just another directory, to which changes can be made same as any other path. The problem is converting this to fossil's concept of a tag, which is a true tag and not just a path. -- ˙uʍop-ǝpısdn sı ɹoʇıuoɯ ɹnoʎ 'sıɥʇ pɐǝɹ uɐɔ noʎ ɟı
_______________________________________________ fossil-dev mailing list fossil-dev@lists.fossil-scm.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-dev
