Bruce Korb <bkorb@cruzio.com> writes:
> There are a couple of things to do, so I'll submit a long log message
> with my tweaks and leave the one-liner for the massive part of the change.
Okay.
Consider a log message with a terse descriptive paragraph at the top,
and then a list of detailed consequences beneath (or is that what you
meant?).
> > The svn_cl__t_cmd_proc type is great, but there's no comment
> > explaining what the arguments look like. For example, are argc
> > and argv already past the first two command line args, or not?
>
> Yep. They *should* be, but are not. Yet. They should be because
> the option processing mumbo jumbo ought to be done before the
> command procedures are called out. Unfortunately, the current
> option processing mechanism requires a complex exchange of information
> between it and the command procedure, so it cannot be done yet.
> So, *FOR THE TIME BEING*, it must be the initial argc/argv.
Okay. This will come out in the wash soon, as we revamp the option
parsing.
> > Also, is there some reason you're putting `t_' first, instead of
> > putting `_t' at the end like the rest of Subversion?
>
> POSIX. POSIX has claimed the entire name space that matches the
> pattern: [a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z_0-9]*_t
> Disgusting land grab, but true.
I think we're just going to assume our `svn_' prefix gives us safety,
and keep the `_t' at the end. They may own the land, but they can't
make us pay rent. :-)
> > - The help message from "svn --help" is problematic.
>
> It was also incomplete. I like what you did with it. Thanks.
Gotcha.
> > I realize that having any help message at all is an improvement
> > over not having one; but the above makes me worry that you're not
> > trying hard enough to see things from the user's point of
> > view...
>
> No. It really means I am trying to check in early and often.
> But I definitely need to be less terse about it so my intentions
> are clearer. My personal approach is to check in if it works
> reliably. Clean up dinkleberries asap afterwards (I do not leave
> them for very long).
That's usually the way I work too, yeah -- commit anytime "make check"
happens to pass. If possible, it's nice to leave a `todo' comment
near stuff you know you're going to continue with, so other's don't
wonder about it. (But I don't always do that either, shame on me.)
Nice chatting on the phone,
-K
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:14 2006