<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12pt">Hello all,<br><br><span>I'm using the annotation feature of the SVN VCS plugin. It doesn't set the "</span>include_merged_revisions" flag when calling svn_client_blame, hence annotation information often indicates who merged changes to a branch, rather than who wrote the original code.<br><br>On the command line, this is equivalent to "svn annotate" without the -g/--use-merge-history option.<br><br>Looking at the source code for kdevplatform, I see:<br><br>plugins/subversion/kdevsvncpp/client_annotate.cpp<br>==========<br>error = svn_client_blame(<br> path.c_str(),<br> revisionStart.revision(),<br>
revisionEnd.revision(),<br> annotateReceiver,<br> entries,<br> *m_context, // client ctx<br> pool);<br>==========<br><br>Looking at libsvn_client code, I see that as of SVN 1.5 a richer API is available:<br>http://subversion.apache.org/docs/api/1.7/group__Blame.html<br>http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client/blame.c?annotate=1493583<br><br>=================<br>svn_error_t* svn_client_blame5 ( const char * path_or_url,<br> const svn_opt_revision_t
* peg_revision,<br> const svn_opt_revision_t * start,<br> const svn_opt_revision_t * end,<br> const svn_diff_file_options_t * diff_options,<br> svn_boolean_t ignore_mime_type,<br> svn_boolean_t include_merged_revisions,<br>
svn_client_blame_receiver3_t receiver,<br> void * receiver_baton,<br> svn_client_ctx_t * ctx,<br> apr_pool_t * pool <br> ) <br>=================<br><br>If kdevplatform's code called svn_client_blame5 with include_merged_revisions set, then the annotations should report the code author rather than the user than merged the code.<br><br>Problems I can envisage:<br>* What version of libsvn_client is available? Build system would need to test for availability of svn_client_blame4/5.<br>* Should include_merged_revisions be set
always or should user be given configuration option to decide? A config option requires additional effort to implement and makes kdevelop more complex to use. I'd suggest setting include_merged_revisions on platforms that support it, without asking the user.<br><br>Is this mailing list the best place to suggest/request an enhancement, should I raise a request on bugs.kde.org?<br><br>Thanks,<br>Paul<br></div></body></html>