Hi Dmitry

Thanks for the quick answer. I'm trying to find for everyfile I read on
SVNKit the revision in which the file was created.

Regards,

Néstor

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Dmitry Pavlenko <pavle...@tmatesoft.com>
wrote:

> Hello Nestor,
> I'm not sure what you mean by "the first revision" but probably the
> following code will help:
>
>         final SvnOperationFactory svnOperationFactory = new
> SvnOperationFactory();
>         try {
>
>             final SvnLog log = svnOperationFactory.createLog();
>             log.setStopOnCopy(stopOnCopy);
>             log.setLimit(1); //get only one revision (the first one)
>             log.addRange(SvnRevisionRange.create(SVNRevision.create(1),
> SVNRevision.HEAD));
>
> log.setSingleTarget(SvnTarget.fromURL(url.appendPath("path/to/file", false),
> SVNRevision.HEAD));
>             final SVNLogEntry logEntry = log.run();
>             final long revision = logEntry.getRevision();
>             System.out.println("revision = " + revision);
>         } finally {
>             svnOperationFactory.dispose();
>         }
>
>
> Set 'stopOnCopy' depending on your requirements: if at some revision your
> "targetFile"  was created
> as a copy of some "sourceFile", should we consider that revision as the
> first revision or should we
> scan history of "sourceFile" to find the first revision.
> --
> Dmitry Pavlenko,
> TMate Software,
> http://subgit.com/ - git-svn bridge
>
> > Hi
> >
> > I'm trying to get the first revision of the files I'm extracting using
> > SVNKit 1.8.10. Because I don't see a method or property that return this
> > value I have to use getFileRevision from 0 to the repository's latest
> > revision to see which is the first revision. I tried searching from 0 to
> > the entry latest revision but I get the following error:
> >
> > "File" is not a file in revision "entry revision"
> >
> > So each time I want to get the first revision I have to iterate from 0 to
> > the repository's last revision just to get one revision and it's very
> slow.
> > Is there a more efficient way?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Néstor
>

Reply via email to