* Molle Bestefich <email@example.com> [2006-01-17 14:40:14]:
> Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
> > Basically, the new dav_svn_get_repo_name2() function uses the
> > dav_svn_split_uri function to retrieve the repository name from the
> > current requested URI if the SVNParentPath directive is used,
> > otherwise it acts like the old dav_svn_get_repo_name.
> So if a repository uses SVNParentPath, the repository name returned
> will be whatever the client decides it should be - it could be an IP
> address, or (using /etc/hosts) any arbitrary name. Whilst
> non-SVNParentPath repositories use the name of the repository folder
> on the server.
> Seems inconsistent to me - why not just rev the function to always use
> whatever the client provides in the URI, instead of doing different
> things depending on a logically completely unrelated aspect of the
> server configuration?
In a non-SVNParentPath setup, the user specifies a descriptive
repository name with the SVNReposName directive. This value is
returned by the dav_svn_get_repo_name function.
But in a SVNParentPath based setup, the user can't specify a name per
repository with SVNReposName, and dav_svn_get_repo_name returns NULL
(there is no repository name defined).
This patch adds a new version of the dav_svn_get_repo_name function
which returns the repository directory name in a SVNParentPath based
setup, and the SVNReposName directive value in a non-SVNParentPath
setup. That's all.
I don't really get why you are talking about IP addresses, host names
and stuff, maybe you could explain ?
Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org)
-- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.
Received on Tue Jan 17 18:02:11 2006