> If it's used by a Subversion program, it should be in the svn:
> namespace. Otherwise it shouldn't be.
That's also my opinion.
> Of course, that just reduces the question to equally unresolved
> questions, like "are there any Subversion GUI programs which count as
> Subversion programs?" and "should {rapidsvn/gsvn/svn ls -v/} use a
> description property?" I have no opinion on those questions.
I think if it's a subversion client then it is a subversion program and
therefore it should use the description property (but it doesn't have to of
course).
Each client could decide whether and how to use those properties.
If such a property would go to a new namespace (and gets documented)
then the documentation must be in the subversion documentation - otherwise
client programmers probably won't know the existence of that property
and therefore not implement it (or even worse: implement an own property
which does the same - which would lead to incompatible clients).
So, if this won't cause any problems (and I think it doesn't) then why
not just do it? Is it really such a big deal? All I'm asking for is a new
property which clients could treat special to give the user one more
possibility to manage a project.
Steve King
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Dec 22 13:46:20 2002