You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by cm...@collab.net on 2001/03/05 18:40:09 UTC
Re: CVS update: subversion/notes delta.dtd
ghudson@tigris.org writes:
> User: ghudson
> Date: 01/03/05 10:26:29
>
> Added: notes delta.dtd
> Log:
> DTD for tree deltas. Written by Branko back in September 2000. I
> think it's still correct.
It's no longer correct (sorry). I made some changes a while back that
involved changes to the DTD. I'm not familiar enough with DTD layouts
to make the edits myself, but I will try to, in the very near future,
summarize the differences between the DTD you just checked in, and
what's really going on in the code.
Thanks for checking in an initial version, though!
Re: CVS update: subversion/notes delta.dtd
Posted by Sam TH <sa...@uchicago.edu>.
On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 09:41:50PM -0600, cmpilato@collab.net wrote:
The attribute lists for file and dir are identical. If someone has a
good name for the category they both belong to, then I'll make it look
nicer.
New patch:
Index: delta.dtd
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/subversion/notes/delta.dtd,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -r1.1 delta.dtd
--- delta.dtd 2001/03/05 18:26:29 1.1
+++ delta.dtd 2001/03/06 20:56:42
@@ -1,6 +1,10 @@
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- XML DTD for Subversion's delta packages. -->
<!ELEMENT delta-pkg (tree-delta, text-delta*)>
+<!ATTLIST delta-pkg
+ base-rev CDATA #IMPLIED
+ target-rev CDATA #IMPLIED
+>
<!-- Delta types. -->
<!ELEMENT prop-delta (set | delete)+>
@@ -35,12 +39,14 @@
<!-- Delta targets. -->
<!ELEMENT dir ((prop-delta, tree-delta?) | (tree-delta, prop-delta?))?>
<!ATTLIST dir
- ancestor CDATA #IMPLIED
- ver CDATA #IMPLIED
+ copyfrom-path CDATA #IMPLIED
+ copyfrom-rev CDATA #IMPLIED
+ base-rev CDATA #IMPLIED
>
<!ELEMENT file ((prop-delta, (text-delta | text-delta-ref)?) |
((text-delta | text-delta-ref), prop-delta?))?>
<!ATTLIST file
- ancestor CDATA #IMPLIED
- ver CDATA #IMPLIED
+ copyfrom-path CDATA #IMPLIED
+ copyfrom-rev CDATA #IMPLIED
+ base-rev CDATA #IMPLIED
>
sam th
sam@uchicago.edu
http://www.abisource.com/~sam/
GnuPG Key:
http://www.abisource.com/~sam/key
Re: CVS update: subversion/notes delta.dtd
Posted by cm...@collab.net.
Sam TH <sa...@uchicago.edu> writes:
> Thanks, I'll work up another patch tonight. It's not hard. But is
> there some reason that the other new attributes that you mention
> aren't being used in the tests/xml files? Are those tests just not
> complex enough? Do the new attributues only get used in weird cases?
> (Should I really just look at the code and figure this out? :-)=20
Since right now you can override the target-rev attribute with the
--revision command-line option to the svn client, I didn't want to try
manufacture some arbitrary value for that attribute to put into the
xml files. Note that if you take, say, co1-inline.xml, and put a
target-rev="31337" in the <delta-pkg> tag, then use that to do a
checkout without passing the --revision argument to the binary, you'll
get a tree built with all the files/dirs at revision 31337, so the
code *does* work under the hood!
The copyfrom-* attributes are only used when a file has been 'svn
copy'd...and the client doesn't even have that command available right
now, I don't think.
In general, lack of necessity kept me from messing with the XML files
too much, or kept me from checking in my dinkings with them.
Re: CVS update: subversion/notes delta.dtd
Posted by Sam TH <sa...@uchicago.edu>.
On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 05:03:28PM -0600, cmpilato@collab.net wrote:
> Sam TH <sa...@uchicago.edu> writes:
>
>
> If I recall correctly, the "ancestor" and "ver" attributes no longer
> exist at all. Added files and dirs can have "copyfrom-path" and
> "copyfrom-rev" attributes instead, and Replaced files and dirs can
> have a "base-rev" attribute. Also, the delta-pkg tag can have
> "base-rev" and "target-rev" attributes. I *think* those are the only
> changes that were made.
Thanks, I'll work up another patch tonight. It's not hard. But is
there some reason that the other new attributes that you mention
aren't being used in the tests/xml files? Are those tests just not
complex enough? Do the new attributues only get used in weird cases?
(Should I really just look at the code and figure this out? :-)
Thanks
sam th
sam@uchicago.edu
http://www.abisource.com/~sam/
GnuPG Key:
http://www.abisource.com/~sam/key
Re: CVS update: subversion/notes delta.dtd
Posted by cm...@collab.net.
Sam TH <sa...@uchicago.edu> writes:
> Actually, I only needed the following patch to get all the
> tests/xml/*.xml documents to validate:
>
> Index: delta.dtd
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> RCS file: /cvs/subversion/notes/delta.dtd,v
> retrieving revision 1.1
> diff -u -r1.1 delta.dtd
> --- delta.dtd 2001/03/05 18:26:29 1.1
> +++ delta.dtd 2001/03/05 22:33:42
> @@ -37,10 +37,12 @@
> <!ATTLIST dir
> ancestor CDATA #IMPLIED
> ver CDATA #IMPLIED
> + base-rev CDATA #IMPLIED
> >
> <!ELEMENT file ((prop-delta, (text-delta | text-delta-ref)?) |
> ((text-delta | text-delta-ref), prop-delta?))?>
> <!ATTLIST file
> ancestor CDATA #IMPLIED
> ver CDATA #IMPLIED
> + base-rev CDATA #IMPLIED
> >
If I recall correctly, the "ancestor" and "ver" attributes no longer
exist at all. Added files and dirs can have "copyfrom-path" and
"copyfrom-rev" attributes instead, and Replaced files and dirs can
have a "base-rev" attribute. Also, the delta-pkg tag can have
"base-rev" and "target-rev" attributes. I *think* those are the only
changes that were made.
Re: CVS update: subversion/notes delta.dtd
Posted by Sam TH <sa...@uchicago.edu>.
On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 12:40:09PM -0600, cmpilato@collab.net wrote:
> ghudson@tigris.org writes:
>
> > User: ghudson
> > Date: 01/03/05 10:26:29
> >
> > Added: notes delta.dtd
> > Log:
> > DTD for tree deltas. Written by Branko back in September 2000. I
> > think it's still correct.
>
> It's no longer correct (sorry). I made some changes a while back that
> involved changes to the DTD. I'm not familiar enough with DTD layouts
> to make the edits myself, but I will try to, in the very near future,
> summarize the differences between the DTD you just checked in, and
> what's really going on in the code.
Actually, I only needed the following patch to get all the
tests/xml/*.xml documents to validate:
Index: delta.dtd
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/subversion/notes/delta.dtd,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -r1.1 delta.dtd
--- delta.dtd 2001/03/05 18:26:29 1.1
+++ delta.dtd 2001/03/05 22:33:42
@@ -37,10 +37,12 @@
<!ATTLIST dir
ancestor CDATA #IMPLIED
ver CDATA #IMPLIED
+ base-rev CDATA #IMPLIED
>
<!ELEMENT file ((prop-delta, (text-delta | text-delta-ref)?) |
((text-delta | text-delta-ref), prop-delta?))?>
<!ATTLIST file
ancestor CDATA #IMPLIED
ver CDATA #IMPLIED
+ base-rev CDATA #IMPLIED
>
Are there other documents that would show the changes more?
sam th
sam@uchicago.edu
http://www.abisource.com/~sam/
GnuPG Key:
http://www.abisource.com/~sam/key