see http://develop.twiki.org/~develop/cgi-bin/rdiff/Bugs/Item563

---

As co-author of the rdiff script, you are better placed to answer that than anyone else. It looks like it works to me, but what do I know?

Perhaps some testcases would help?

CC

---

i recon its busted, but I will need to investigate if its worse than Cairo, or what size change it is (the link above does not show that Will added alot of info in the Details fiels in r2, in fact it suggests that the Details FORMFIELD was removed altogether) -- SD

---

not specifiec enough. discarded. CC

---

Clearly, the rdiff in above example is incorrect. It appears that a field was deleted, where in fact much text had been added.

In http://develop.twiki.org/~develop/cgi-bin/rdiff/Bugs/Item564 the rdiff has the right information, but the formatting is incorrect on the "Details" field: it shows the added information in raw text rather than rendered.

In http://develop.twiki.org/~develop/cgi-bin/rdiff/Bugs/Item565 both the added and deleted information are shown in raw text, rather than rendered.

We have three random samples of rdiff, none behaving as expected, but each behaving slightly different. Clearly something is not right with form diffing --TW

---

I will look into rdiff after I have worked on upgrade -- SD (thanks for the further info Thomas)

depressingly, this is how rdiff worked in cairo - it needs work for diffing form fields - defering - SD

---

Although a "would be nice to have", good move to defer this.

PTh

Undeferred, post Dakar CC

---

Dropping priority of this to "Enhancement". Diff works, it's just a bit ugly sometimes.

CC

---

Setting to No Action. RDiff is deprecated for CompareRevisionsAddOn.

-- GeorgeClark - 07 Jan 2015