You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Neels J Hofmeyr <ne...@elego.de> on 2011/09/22 14:46:46 UTC
EXTERNALS table column names confused.
Hi all,
I just noticed that, since "operative revision" != "peg revision", the
column names in the EXTERNALS table are confused/confusing.
They are:
def_operational_revision (supposed to be the peg rev)
def_revision (supposed to be the operat*ive* rev)
So I'd like to change that. The question is: when. Now? For 1.8?
~Neels
Re: EXTERNALS table column names confused.
Posted by Neels J Hofmeyr <ne...@elego.de>.
On 09/22/2011 03:01 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Neels J Hofmeyr <ne...@elego.de> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I just noticed that, since "operative revision" != "peg revision", the
>> column names in the EXTERNALS table are confused/confusing.
>>
>> They are:
>>
>> def_operational_revision (supposed to be the peg rev)
>> def_revision (supposed to be the operat*ive* rev)
>>
>> So I'd like to change that. The question is: when. Now? For 1.8?
>
> Adding columns to a table is easy, removing them takes a bit more
> work. Since I suspect your change would require a bit of both, I
> think it falls into the "bit more work" category.
>
> That being said, the f99 format (which should be the first bump for
> 1.8) is there so that we can do changes which require this extra work.
> Since things are functioning right now for 1.7, I'd suggest making
> this change in 1.8, if you feel it should be made at all.
Ok, I'm fine with that. (It would actually be adding a new one with the
*exact* same content and semantics of an old one and then removing the old
one, x2.) Thanks,
~Neels
Re: EXTERNALS table column names confused.
Posted by Hyrum K Wright <hy...@wandisco.com>.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Neels J Hofmeyr <ne...@elego.de> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just noticed that, since "operative revision" != "peg revision", the
> column names in the EXTERNALS table are confused/confusing.
>
> They are:
>
> def_operational_revision (supposed to be the peg rev)
> def_revision (supposed to be the operat*ive* rev)
>
> So I'd like to change that. The question is: when. Now? For 1.8?
Adding columns to a table is easy, removing them takes a bit more
work. Since I suspect your change would require a bit of both, I
think it falls into the "bit more work" category.
That being said, the f99 format (which should be the first bump for
1.8) is there so that we can do changes which require this extra work.
Since things are functioning right now for 1.7, I'd suggest making
this change in 1.8, if you feel it should be made at all.
-Hyrum
--
uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy
http://www.uberSVN.com/