David Glasser wrote:
> On 8/8/06, C. Michael Pilato <email@example.com> wrote:
>> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> >>2. Why does it not check the property name before starting the editor?
>> > Hrm. Now there's a good question. I'd call that a bug.
>> Aha. The is-valid check happens down in libsvn_client, well after the
>> editor has been used to get a property value. I think we should
>> expose the
>> is_valid_propname (and similar) checks through the svn_client.h API, and
>> teach the command-line client to use them before firing up the editor.
> Out of curiousity, is it intentional that propname validity checking
> happens at the svn_client level and not at a lower level?
> I was actually considering sending a message about a similar issue
> just this week, after discovering a bug in svk where it misparsed the
> auto-props configuration section and silently set properties with
> names like " svn:eol-style" (with a leading space). Having any "valid
> property name" API at all would be great, but does it make sense to
> allow weird property names at the repository level? (I guess you have
> to for compatibility reasons now.)
I'm pretty sure I've argued this (or something very similar regarding path
names) *very* recently. Sure, we could teach libsvn_repos to do similar
checks (though, keep your grubby hands offa the libsvn_fs layer, bucko!).
Of course, doing this kind of check *only* at the repos layer instead of
also at the client side is counterproductive. Besides delaying sanity
checks until well after real user work has been done, it also defeats one of
the points of the checks in the first place -- to keep data that can't be
transported via our XML protocol (ra-dav) off the wire entirely.
C. Michael Pilato <firstname.lastname@example.org>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Received on Tue Aug 8 17:23:38 2006