On 04.01.2012 11:09, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2012-01-03 15:44:47 +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> I think this whole thread is slightly bogus. It should be obvious that
>> whatever is in the svn:author field has better be a unique identifier of
>> the person responsible for the commit, regardless of how it gets there.
> I'd say that this choice should entirely be made by the administrator
> of the repository.
Exactly. And we give that choice, at least for Apache-embedded servers
(which is what enterprises will use, I hope).
If we, say, added another property where admins could write a whole
other set of information, we'd either have to define the format (and
incidentally tee off the 90% who want a different format), or leave the
contents up to the administrator (and tee off the other 90% who want
compatibility across diverse installations).
I still don't understand why it's so hard for other tools to, e.g., look
up the svn:author unique ID on an LDAP server somewhere. Otherwise we're
effectively duplicating (a small part of) any of the "standard"
(Yeah, I know that "enterprise" tools like to duplicate functionality
and mess up open standards while they're at it, but I don't see why we
should be doing the same.)
Received on 2012-01-04 11:36:28 CET