You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net> on 2002/11/20 12:53:44 UTC
vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Hey,
I just completed testing of a rather large round of changes to the fs.
The core logic is the same. There are just a few more pointers now:-)
All tests pass both locally and over DAV on Suse 7.3
I still need to make dsp file updates and I need to write a summary
section for my log_entry.
I will also make updates to the design web site I posted a while back.
Maybe I'll even make it understandable this time .... nah not likely:-)
This is just one step towards my goal of a SQL based FS which can
co-exist peacefully with the BDB FS.
I just wanted to let you guys know it is coming.
I must go sleep now.
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net>.
>
>
>Why not just create a branch and check it in there?
>
>
>
Well, I would need limited commit access to do it.
I'm not sure I have passed the required litmus test yet:-)
This is a brutal first patch.
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by Blair Zajac <bl...@orcaware.com>.
"Glenn A. Thompson" wrote:
>
> hey,
>
> Karl Fogel wrote:
>
> >"Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net> writes:
> >
> >
> >>I just realized that this is a patch, and as such it should have
> >>[PATCH] in the subject:-)
> >>http://www.cdrguys.com/subversion/index.html
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Heh :-), thanks.
> >
> >That's pretty big patch. May take a while for someone to get to (as
> >you were probably aware), just wanted to say so up front...
> >
> You think? :-)
>
> No Problemo. It does pass the test suite on my box. But if there is
> other testing you want me to put it through just let me know.
> I have a separate wc just for this patch. Until someone "yays or nays
> it" I'll keep it synced up with Head as best I can. If I get conflicts
> I'll post fixes as additional links on the same web page.
> Is this an OK way to go?
Why not just create a branch and check it in there?
Best,
Blair
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net>.
>
> Can we please just create a branch and let gat work on that.
> Development is a lot easier to follow when it
> takes place in the repos. Furthermore I think this is cool enough to
> attract other developers to help out.
>
gat blushes
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net>.
Hey,
>Oh gosh, I fear I've made it sound as though there's some exclusive
>membership requirement for this club or something, sorry. We're not
>trying to set up barriers and gates here; the only reason I'm
>recommending this course is because I think it's the fastest way to
>get these changes incorporated safely.
>
>
>
No I don't think that at all. I've been on the list long enough to
respect the talent. I'm just trying to be respectful. If my changes
weren't so large I wouldn't sound so cautious. And don't worry, you
won't scare me away. I'm stoked. When I'm stoked I code. When I code,
I smile:-) I don't want to freak you guys out but I have 6000+ LOC more
hiding in the wings. Don't worry they can be kept separate very
easily:-) I talk about it a little on the SQL page. I plan to first
clean and shrink it, then I'll add back in. That was the idea behind
the indirection. To allow scary stuff to be written and tested with all
the great stuff you guys have without toppling the most data critical
portion of the code. The other key ingredient is that it must be able
to be working side by side with the baseline in the same executable. In
order to preserve the FS API, I want to be able to run the same
"blackbox" test cases side by side against separate repo's using the
same binary. I choose the name baseline carefully. If an experimental
FS impl can't match the baseline it is not an FS impl by definition. If
testing conflicts occur that point to a problem with the baseline then
it must be fixed before any other versions change/improve the behaviour.
This is the way I'm thinking anyway. The baseline has to remain to
keep the FS stable.
Feel free to abuse as needed. Please limit abuse for the next two weeks
though. I'm into this stuff so much I can't resist the temptation to
respond:-)
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by Karl Fogel <kf...@newton.ch.collab.net>.
"Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net> writes:
> OK. I can take a wack at it. But the next couple weeks I really have
> to focus on my other work.
> So I may just keep updating every night. I have been doing it for
> weeks. In other words just keep it working locally.
> Then when I get my time back, I'd do as you suggest. Is that OK?
Sure!
> I understand. Which ones do you consider interesting in a general
> sense? Basically, the whole patch revolves around adding indirection.
Well, yeah, really you're right -- the entire patch is a no-op in
terms of functional changes. So once we get all those applied, there
won't be any patch left, and the branch will really be for the sql
backend :-).
> OK. I may need some help identifying what is an appropriate first
> patch. Would the trail vtable combined with the
> (baseline_db_access_funcs_t now called svn_fs__bl_db_access_funcs_t)
> be too huge? It would at least limit all changes to libsvn_fs and
> below. Actually, no it won't. The test stuff would still have to
> change some. Once I rename the bdb functions, it would be nice to go
> ahead and add the indirection as I will have to change those lines
> anyway.
That sounds good, yeah. Obviously there's a limit on how much one can
break up some of these changes.
> Certainly the api vtable can come later That one is a bit
> scary hun? But I really do need it long term. Some of the structures
> I moved into fs-base-impl.h I may be able to move in a second round.
> Sorry guys. I guess I'm a little monolithic in my thinking:-) Let me
> simmer over the weekend.
Sure.
> Mike you poor sick puppy:-) Did you get the short straw?
Nah, he volunteered, can you believe it?
> It's alright Karl. I kinda expected this. After all, I've already
> pulled some changes out. As I tried to explain to Ben and Mike at
> dinner. My struggle was how to show where I'm headed on this stuff.
> My initial web pages did a poor job. So, I just rolled and rolled and
> rolled thinking the code would do it. I'm much better at verbal
> communication than written.
No problem at all. It's very clear where you're headed, and the log
message is quite readable too. Just big :-).
> I'm sorry if I diverted you guys from other work. Assuming I can meet
> svn standards, I will help out on the milestones down the road to help
> make up for my coming to the party so late.
Oh gosh, I fear I've made it sound as though there's some exclusive
membership requirement for this club or something, sorry. We're not
trying to set up barriers and gates here; the only reason I'm
recommending this course is because I think it's the fastest way to
get these changes incorporated safely.
-K
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net>.
>
>
>You patch has some really separable parts (and some parts that
>probably didn't need to change at all). I'd like, for example, to see
>a patch that strictly covers the renaming of the bdb/*.c functions to
>have "svn_fs__bdb" prefixes. I like that change, I should have done
>it myself when I did the re-org a while back.
>
>On the other hand, I *don't* like the renaming of 'revision_root' and
>'transaction_root' to 'kind_revision_root' and 'kind_transaction_root'
>-- just unnecessary mods outright.
>
Mike with the ol laser vision:-)
I seem to remember that change being related to some greping I was
doing. I'll make it go away.
I'll make a mail folder to collect these type of things in until I get
back in gear. The Garrett pointed out was a major boo boo also.
>
>
>>Mike you poor sick puppy:-) Did you get the short straw?
>>
>>
>
>No, I offered to do this since I've been a really vocal opponent
>(mostly off-list) of us just giving you a branch. It was an uphill
>fight against Ben and Karl (not really), and my offer was a way of
>staking a personal connection to this process. I *do* like what I've
>seen of your proposal, I *do* think (especially having met you in
>person) that competence won't be a concern. But I want our processes
>to be beneficial to everyone *and* produce reviewable, excellent code
>changes.
>
>
Well thanks.
>
>Nah...just isn't a good thing...
>
>
>
Heh. Got it.
I'm going to go off-line now guys. Those dang bills:-)
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by cm...@collab.net.
"Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net> writes:
> OK. I can take a wack at it. But the next couple weeks I really
> have to focus on my other work. So I may just keep updating every
> night. I have been doing it for weeks. In other words just keep it
> working locally. Then when I get my time back, I'd do as you
> suggest. Is that OK?
>
> I understand. Which ones do you consider interesting in a general
> sense? Basically, the whole patch revolves around adding indirection.
You patch has some really separable parts (and some parts that
probably didn't need to change at all). I'd like, for example, to see
a patch that strictly covers the renaming of the bdb/*.c functions to
have "svn_fs__bdb" prefixes. I like that change, I should have done
it myself when I did the re-org a while back.
On the other hand, I *don't* like the renaming of 'revision_root' and
'transaction_root' to 'kind_revision_root' and 'kind_transaction_root'
-- just unnecessary mods outright.
> Mike you poor sick puppy:-) Did you get the short straw?
No, I offered to do this since I've been a really vocal opponent
(mostly off-list) of us just giving you a branch. It was an uphill
fight against Ben and Karl (not really), and my offer was a way of
staking a personal connection to this process. I *do* like what I've
seen of your proposal, I *do* think (especially having met you in
person) that competence won't be a concern. But I want our processes
to be beneficial to everyone *and* produce reviewable, excellent code
changes.
> I'm sorry if I diverted you guys from other work. Assuming I can meet
> svn standards, I will help out on the milestones down the road to help
> make up for my coming to the party so late.
It's not a problem. All of this *is* our work. Your changes have the
potential to add an amazing feature that we've all wanted for ages, so
we're necessarily torn by assigning time to making sure that
Subversion's near-term goals are met, while still promoting the more
long-term Goodness of the product. It benefits no one if we are so
concerned with today that processes that should be concerrent are
stalled.
us> $ 'svn lock subversion-design.txt'
us> $ # go into a hole to work on near-term goals...
us> $
you> $ 'svn ci new-hotness.txt'
you> error: the future seems to be locked by user 'us'.
you> consider drop-kicking that user.
you> $
Nah...just isn't a good thing...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net>.
Hey:
Karl Fogel wrote:
>I think patch vs branch is not the important question yet.
>
>The real issue is breaking this change down into small, incremental
>chunks, and getting as many of them as possible applied to trunk.
>Then the non-trivial parts of the patch (i.e., the potentially
>destabilizing stuff) can be submitted as a separate patch, or Glenn
>can be given a branch. A lot of this patch is trivial stuff like
>renames, adding functionally equivalent layers of indirection, etc.
>For example, renaming the "berkeley" functions to "bdb" and putting
>them behind their own vtable.
>
>
OK. I can take a wack at it. But the next couple weeks I really have
to focus on my other work.
So I may just keep updating every night. I have been doing it for
weeks. In other words just keep it working locally.
Then when I get my time back, I'd do as you suggest. Is that OK?
>If we just put the whole thing on a branch now, then the trivial stuff
>will languish there along with the interesting changes. No one will
>ever dare to merge the branch over to trunk, because it'll be too big,
>thus unreviewable.
>
I understand. Which ones do you consider interesting in a general sense?
Basically, the whole patch revolves around adding indirection.
>
>Glenn, what we need is for you to resubmit a series of individual
>patches (it's okay for them to be serially dependent), where the front
>of the series is the trivial stuff, and the end of the series contains
>the significant changes.
>
>
OK. I may need some help identifying what is an appropriate first patch.
Would the trail vtable combined with the (baseline_db_access_funcs_t now
called svn_fs__bl_db_access_funcs_t) be too huge? It would at least
limit all changes to libsvn_fs and below. Actually, no it won't. The
test stuff would still have to change some. Once I rename the bdb
functions, it would be nice to go ahead and add the indirection as I
will have to change those lines anyway. Certainly the api vtable can
come later That one is a bit scary hun? But I really do need it long
term. Some of the structures I moved into fs-base-impl.h I may be able
to move in a second round. Sorry guys. I guess I'm a little monolithic
in my thinking:-) Let me simmer over the weekend.
>The trivial ones will be reviewed quickly and applied to trunk if they
>look good. Mike Pilato has just committed to this verbally :-), but
>he won't be alone. Then you won't have to maintain them anymore, and
>we don't have to worry about a huge merge -- everyone wins. (Also, if
>the patches get to the point where don't need much tweaking, then
>you'll probably just be committing them yourself, even easier.)
>
>
Mike you poor sick puppy:-) Did you get the short straw?
>After that, we can see what's left. If the remaining change is
>complex and experimental, and needs massaging over time, by all means
>let's do it on a branch. But maybe it won't be so large, or it will
>turn it that it can also be broken down into smaller chunks, or
>whatever. We can cross that bridge when we come to it.
>
>I know this is somewhat less convenient for you, but it's the best
>course for getting this important change into Subversion. If this
>change remains monolithic, it won't matter whether it's in a patch or
>on a branch -- it will still be impossible to review.
>
>
>
It's alright Karl. I kinda expected this. After all, I've already
pulled some changes out. As I tried to explain to Ben and Mike at
dinner. My struggle was how to show where I'm headed on this stuff. My
initial web pages did a poor job. So, I just rolled and rolled and
rolled thinking the code would do it. I'm much better at verbal
communication than written.
Maybe as part of a litmus test I could submit a patch to config.c The
changes are only used by my SQL code ATM, but only two files change!
I'm sorry if I diverted you guys from other work. Assuming I can meet
svn standards, I will help out on the milestones down the road to help
make up for my coming to the party so late.
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by Karl Fogel <kf...@newton.ch.collab.net>.
I think patch vs branch is not the important question yet.
The real issue is breaking this change down into small, incremental
chunks, and getting as many of them as possible applied to trunk.
Then the non-trivial parts of the patch (i.e., the potentially
destabilizing stuff) can be submitted as a separate patch, or Glenn
can be given a branch. A lot of this patch is trivial stuff like
renames, adding functionally equivalent layers of indirection, etc.
For example, renaming the "berkeley" functions to "bdb" and putting
them behind their own vtable.
If we just put the whole thing on a branch now, then the trivial stuff
will languish there along with the interesting changes. No one will
ever dare to merge the branch over to trunk, because it'll be too big,
thus unreviewable.
Glenn, what we need is for you to resubmit a series of individual
patches (it's okay for them to be serially dependent), where the front
of the series is the trivial stuff, and the end of the series contains
the significant changes.
The trivial ones will be reviewed quickly and applied to trunk if they
look good. Mike Pilato has just committed to this verbally :-), but
he won't be alone. Then you won't have to maintain them anymore, and
we don't have to worry about a huge merge -- everyone wins. (Also, if
the patches get to the point where don't need much tweaking, then
you'll probably just be committing them yourself, even easier.)
After that, we can see what's left. If the remaining change is
complex and experimental, and needs massaging over time, by all means
let's do it on a branch. But maybe it won't be so large, or it will
turn it that it can also be broken down into smaller chunks, or
whatever. We can cross that bridge when we come to it.
I know this is somewhat less convenient for you, but it's the best
course for getting this important change into Subversion. If this
change remains monolithic, it won't matter whether it's in a patch or
on a branch -- it will still be impossible to review.
-K
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net>.
Hey,
I was working on this when Garretts e-mail came in.
It's killing me I should be working on my paying job, but I can't get
this stuff out of my head. I've been subverted:-) I wanted to hold off
submitting but I wanted you guys to see what I'm working on. back and
forth I went in my head. So now I'm crazy and it's all your fault:-)
The namespace problem he mentioned should have never been missed.
Sorry. Or should I say scary.
cmpilato@collab.net wrote:
>Sander Striker <st...@apache.org> writes:
>
>
>
>>Can we please just create a branch and let gat work on
>>that. Development is a lot easier to follow when it takes place in
>>the repos. Furthermore I think this is cool enough to attract other
>>developers to help out.
>>
>>
>
>Ben, Karl, and I had dinner with Glenn the other night, and I think we
>all agree that a branch would be a Good Thing, but there are a couple
>of reasons why we (at least, Glenn, Ben and I -- Karl had to jet
>early) decided not to go this route up front:
>
This was my understanding as well. I'm not saying I don't want a
branch. I'm saying I haven't earned a branch *yet*:-)
> 1. We don't generally give commit access -- for any reason -- to
> someone who has not, as Glenn says himself, "passed the litmus
> test". Once we've seen some of his work, we can better
> consider the branch option.
>
what he said.
> 2. Glenn admitted that his initial runs at this work were not
> being done in a way that minimized code churn on a per-patch
> basis. In other words, and as you can see for yourself, his
> first patch is a friggin' bomb-blast in the ol' FS construction
> area! :-)
>
You were kinda warned:-) And anyone who helps me get this pig in, I owe
huge
>Glenn could benefit from a lot of initial review of
> his patch, as well as some suggestions on how to, in the
> future, make his changes more incrementally.
>
>Glenn, I don't *think* I'm speaking out of line with this -- if I am,
>
>
>I'll accept public beratement as you see fit to so deliver.
>
Beratement; not gonna doit:-) The last thing in the world I want to do
is mess up Subversion. I plan to earn a seat at the table.
>The rest of you: I think Glenn has some good ideas about tackling what
>is likely to be the biggest change to Subversion since self-hosting,
>and I'd be thrilled if everyone who "gotz tha skeelz" could take the
>time to review his work, understand and brainstorm about his master
>plan, and then help him with the implementation.
>
>
To be honest, the SQL page is only the tip of my evil master plan.
Unfortunately, my writing skills are not so great. OK so they suck.
But I will write and re-write until my point is made well. Once I get
this other crap I'm working on finished. uggghh.
That said, it's important that my work not mess with the primary goals.
Period. End of story. I would feel horrible if it did. But I know the
commiters won't let that happen. Which is totally cool from where I'm
sitting. In the basement by the way.
Some of my views:
DAV and Apache were awesome choices. The auto-commit stuff will bring
users in droves. No doubt in my mind.
But the thing that turns me on the most is the FS/repos. I really want
to roll up my sleeves and become one with it :-) It's a nice balance of
complexity and simplicity. I friggin love it. The permanent store is
the holy grail in my mind. I can't begin to list the number of things I
think it applies to. I'm sure you guys see it. You built the thing.
When you guys were looking for a logo. I wanted to submit a sponge btw.
Lastly, let me leave you with this thought. Many people on this list
have talked about their favorite ra layer. Mine would have to be
ra_federated. Imagine a world where repos' play nice together. Like
so. Hi, I'm gats repo. What's your name? Do we have any common
friends. OH cool ......... Behind door number 1 is my java tape library
stuff, enjoy. Behind door number two is .... I have have about 10GB of
free space if you need a mirror. Please submit your mirroring requests
as follows .....
I know you guys have sat around thinking about this crazy kind of stuff;
right?
OK now I'm going to go work. Email is down and I'm going to go close xchat.
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by cm...@collab.net.
Sander Striker <st...@apache.org> writes:
> Can we please just create a branch and let gat work on
> that. Development is a lot easier to follow when it takes place in
> the repos. Furthermore I think this is cool enough to attract other
> developers to help out.
Ben, Karl, and I had dinner with Glenn the other night, and I think we
all agree that a branch would be a Good Thing, but there are a couple
of reasons why we (at least, Glenn, Ben and I -- Karl had to jet
early) decided not to go this route up front:
1. We don't generally give commit access -- for any reason -- to
someone who has not, as Glenn says himself, "passed the litmus
test". Once we've seen some of his work, we can better
consider the branch option.
2. Glenn admitted that his initial runs at this work were not
being done in a way that minimized code churn on a per-patch
basis. In other words, and as you can see for yourself, his
first patch is a friggin' bomb-blast in the ol' FS construction
area! :-) Glenn could benefit from a lot of initial review of
his patch, as well as some suggestions on how to, in the
future, make his changes more incrementally.
Glenn, I don't *think* I'm speaking out of line with this -- if I am,
I'll accept public beratement as you see fit to so deliver.
The rest of you: I think Glenn has some good ideas about tackling what
is likely to be the biggest change to Subversion since self-hosting,
and I'd be thrilled if everyone who "gotz tha skeelz" could take the
time to review his work, understand and brainstorm about his master
plan, and then help him with the implementation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
Glenn A. Thompson wrote:
> hey,
>
> Karl Fogel wrote:
>
>> "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net> writes:
>>
>>
>>> I just realized that this is a patch, and as such it should have
>>> [PATCH] in the subject:-)
>>> http://www.cdrguys.com/subversion/index.html
>>>
>>
>>
>> Heh :-), thanks.
>>
>> That's pretty big patch. May take a while for someone to get to (as
>> you were probably aware), just wanted to say so up front...
>>
> You think? :-)
>
> No Problemo. It does pass the test suite on my box. But if there is
> other testing you want me to put it through just let me know.
> I have a separate wc just for this patch. Until someone "yays or nays
> it" I'll keep it synced up with Head as best I can. If I get
> conflicts I'll post fixes as additional links on the same web page.
> Is this an OK way to go?
>
> gat
Can we please just create a branch and let gat work on that.
Development is a lot easier to follow when it
takes place in the repos. Furthermore I think this is cool enough to
attract other developers to help out.
Sander
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Kirby C. Bohling" <kb...@birddog.com>.
On Thu, 2002-11-21 at 16:44, Glenn A. Thompson wrote:
> hey,
>
> Karl Fogel wrote:
>
> >"Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net> writes:
.. Snip...
> >That's pretty big patch. May take a while for someone to get to (as
> >you were probably aware), just wanted to say so up front...
> >
> You think? :-)
>
> No Problemo. It does pass the test suite on my box. But if there is
> other testing you want me to put it through just let me know.
> I have a separate wc just for this patch. Until someone "yays or nays
> it" I'll keep it synced up with Head as best I can. If I get conflicts
> I'll post fixes as additional links on the same web page.
> Is this an OK way to go?
Branches are good. Any compelling reason it's not on a seperate branch
that's sync'ed with changes on the trunk? IMHO it'd be easier for
others too keep in sync/review if they had an interest. Other then the
commit logs going out to the poor modem users, I don't see the downside
to it.
Kirby
>
> gat
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
--
Real Programmers view electronic multimedia files with a hex editor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net>.
hey,
Karl Fogel wrote:
>"Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net> writes:
>
>
>>I just realized that this is a patch, and as such it should have
>>[PATCH] in the subject:-)
>>http://www.cdrguys.com/subversion/index.html
>>
>>
>
>Heh :-), thanks.
>
>That's pretty big patch. May take a while for someone to get to (as
>you were probably aware), just wanted to say so up front...
>
You think? :-)
No Problemo. It does pass the test suite on my box. But if there is
other testing you want me to put it through just let me know.
I have a separate wc just for this patch. Until someone "yays or nays
it" I'll keep it synced up with Head as best I can. If I get conflicts
I'll post fixes as additional links on the same web page.
Is this an OK way to go?
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by Karl Fogel <kf...@newton.ch.collab.net>.
"Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net> writes:
> I just realized that this is a patch, and as such it should have
> [PATCH] in the subject:-)
> http://www.cdrguys.com/subversion/index.html
Heh :-), thanks.
That's pretty big patch. May take a while for someone to get to (as
you were probably aware), just wanted to say so up front...
-K
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net>.
Hey,
By the way I totally agree with CMike's e-mail.
Garrett Rooney wrote:
> On Thursday, November 21, 2002, at 04:18 PM, Glenn A. Thompson wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> I just realized that this is a patch, and as such it should have
>> [PATCH] in the subject:-)
>> http://www.cdrguys.com/subversion/index.html
>
>
> i have almost no experience with the fs code, but i'm glancing over
> the diff, and a few things occured to me...
>
> basename_db_access_funcs_t
>
> what's with the name? first off, it should be namespace
> protected, so svn_ something, and i don't see the reason to lump
> 'baseline' at the front of it. i'd probably call it
> 'svn_fs_db_access_funcs_t' or something.
OH shit I missed that, svn_fs should precede it. I will fix it. I can't
believe I missed that one. As for the baseline thing. It want to
shorten it to bl. Now as to why. I view the existing FS as just that.
The baseline. I want FS developers to be free to write at the FS API
level or to write a DB backend against the existing logic. Or some
combination. The trail changes combined with this vtable should allow
it. The first SQL Backend will do just that. I don't think it will be
the best SQL solution but I think I can make it work well to start with.
I'm sure there will be a few gotchas.
A next genration SQL FS may look quite a bit different.
>
> comments
>
> no need for the 'This gets included instead of bdb/xxx.h files'
> comments. that can go in the log or something, but there's no reason
> to enshrine it in the source forever...
I actually didn't expect people to want to commit it as is. I had
trouble deciding how and where to comment it.
I was leaving markers for those who know the existing code to grok what
I did. I'm happy to rip those comments.
>
>
> -garrett
>
I have to bail for now sorry. I will do a better job explaining my
ideas soon.
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On Thursday, November 21, 2002, at 04:18 PM, Glenn A. Thompson wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I just realized that this is a patch, and as such it should have
> [PATCH] in the subject:-)
> http://www.cdrguys.com/subversion/index.html
i have almost no experience with the fs code, but i'm glancing over the
diff, and a few things occured to me...
basename_db_access_funcs_t
what's with the name? first off, it should be namespace protected, so
svn_ something, and i don't see the reason to lump 'baseline' at the
front of it. i'd probably call it 'svn_fs_db_access_funcs_t' or
something.
comments
no need for the 'This gets included instead of bdb/xxx.h files'
comments. that can go in the log or something, but there's no reason
to enshrine it in the source forever...
-garrett
--
garrett rooney Remember, any design flaw you're
rooneg@electricjellyfish.net sufficiently snide about becomes
http://electricjellyfish.net/ a feature. -- Dan Sugalski
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
[PATCH] fs patch was vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net>.
Hey,
I just realized that this is a patch, and as such it should have [PATCH]
in the subject:-)
http://www.cdrguys.com/subversion/index.html
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net>.
Hey,
I updated the patch so it includes the new files. It's based on 3847
now. I re-ran the tests over ra_local and all is still well
on my box.
http://www.cdrguys.com/subversion/index.html.
gat
Glenn A. Thompson wrote:
> OH Crap.
>
> I knew I should have sleep before posting the patch.
> I transfered only certain changes from my normal working copy to a
> fresh wc for testing. I forgot to schedule an add of all the new files.
>
> Sorry, I'll repost.
> gat
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: vtable-fi-cation of the fs
Posted by "Glenn A. Thompson" <gt...@cdr.net>.
OH Crap.
I knew I should have sleep before posting the patch.
I transfered only certain changes from my normal working copy to a fresh
wc for testing. I forgot to schedule an add of all the new files.
Sorry, I'll repost.
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org