VCS: Proposal for a change of arguments to remove(), checkout() and import()

[Fabian Wiesel]

First of an off-topic question: Did you receive all the various editing
stages, too? Or is it just my mail-program mis-displaying something?

2009/3/27 Andreas Pakulat <apaku at gmx.de>

> Can you please use diff -u  for patches? Makes them easier to read - IMHO.
>
Okay, I will prepare the full patch, and post it on the reviewboard. I
thought since this would become a fairly wide-reaching patch
I'd rather distill the essence, as it otherwise could scare people.

While symmetry of API is good, I don't like a parameter that does nothing.
> If you remove a directory X from vcs control then that is always recursive.


Certainly, in that case the flag would be redundant. I will update the
test-case to test that behaviour.


> No, the vcsmapping was introduced to support systems where one can have
> multiple sources checked out into different local locations. This is
> something perforce supports, so you'd say:
>
> put http://repo/foo/bar into /home/me/projectfoo/bar
> put http://repo/baz into /home/me/projectfoo/baz
>
> in perforce. And the Matthew who back then created the interfaces with me
> is interested in writing perforce support at some point.
>

This may be a reason why VcsMapping came into existence, but it doesn't
negate the problems I cited.
What does one gain by batching all the checkouts? And is it sensible to
require all but one VCS to re-implement said capability?


Fabian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20090327/9b8dd4d9/attachment.html>