[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r1140482 - /subversion/branches/svn-bisect/BRANCH-README

From: Arwin Arni <arwin_at_collab.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:49:10 +0530

On Tuesday 28 June 2011 09:30 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Arwin Arni wrote on Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 15:45:04 +0530:
>> On Tuesday 28 June 2011 03:36 PM, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
>>> Stefan Sperling<stsp_at_elego.de> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:12:22PM +0530, Arwin Arni wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday 28 June 2011 03:01 PM, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
>>>>>>> +svn bisect start [-rN[:M]]
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>> When we discussed you had a concern that above syntax is different from
>>>>>> the normal svn sub command syntax. Is this finalized?
>>>>>>
>>>>> I wouldn't say it's finalized.. I simply wrote down a spec as a rough draft.
>>>>> I'm sure the community will have some ideas about this. (Like implementing
>>>>> a sub-subcommand interface of some sort.)
>>>> I'd say just have a set of long options that are mutually exclusive,
>>>> one for each "subcommand".
>>>>
>>>> svn bisect --start
>>>> svn bisect --good
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> This will be easiest to do with the current argument parsing code, and
>>>> also means people can type things in any order they like (--good -r42,
>>>> or -r42 --good).
>>> Do we really need to use -r to mention revision?
>>>
>>> How about --good<rev> --bad<rev> ?
>>>
>>> Is this complicated with the existing parser?
>>>
>>> Thanks and Regards
>>> Noorul
>> Yeah, the current system will not work well with --good<rev>.
>>
> Huh?
I meant to say in order to fully utilize the existing -r format (revsion
number, date, keywords like HEAD BASE etc) we can't accept something
like svn bisect --good 12345 or svn bisect --good HEAD.. We need to
accept svn bisect --good -r <revision>
Received on 2011-06-29 12:19:59 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.