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

Re: Greg Stein's several issues: proposed resolutions

From: Sam TH <sam_at_uchicago.edu>
Date: 2000-12-22 09:51:33 CET

On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 03:17:04PM -0600, Karl Fogel wrote:
> 1. Should property names be URIs?
>
> (Oh, I see you just sent a mail saying "I relent, for now.". Heh.
> Anyway, I'll describe this issue briefly so we all agree what we're
> talking about.) The two sub-questions are:
>
> a) Subversion-specific prop names need a unique prefix. Should
> that prefix be "svn:" or some longer URI? We lobby for plain
> old "svn:" -- it's easier to work with, and the namespace
> protection is frankly about the same.
>
> b) Should all other prop names always be URIs? When the user
> doesn't specify a URI, should Subversion force it into a URI?
> We say no, let the namespace sort itself out. This has worked
> fine with many other systems in the past, and our experience
> (which may or may not be the same as yours) suggests that URI
> schemes don't really improve matters, they just make everyone
> work with longer strings.

<delurk>
Allow me to again suggest the use of urn's. For example, an
SVN specific property could be

        urn:svn:an:svn:prop:in:the:local:copy

or some such.

This is short, and unique. Yay.

                                sam th
                                sam@uchicago.edu
                                http://www.abisource.com/~sam
                                GnuPG Key:
                                http://www.abisource.com/~sam/key

  • application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:18 2006

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