RE: file:// -> svn://

On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Sander Striker wrote:

> Register the svn: namespace
> [which we should do anyway]

+0

This will require an rfc, detailing the full semantics of the url
according to rfc2717. And that may still change in the future.

I see potential flame wars ahead, particularly since it's
agreed that there's a bunch of stuff we'd like, but are schedules
for "post 1.0".

One advantage of a schema like:

svn:file:... for the current ra_local stuff
svn:http:...
svn:https:...
svn:pipe:... for ssh tunneled stuff, if it ever turns up
svn:db:... for using postgres

is that we could document "svn:file:" now, to RFC standards,
pretty much, and have virgin namespace territory for anyone
wanting to add features or storage layers later. (Eg, for
the mounted filesystem people have been mentioning lately, we
could have svn:native:, and if the development there screws
up on a Friday night, people can still svn up, then run
./configure --without-alpha-stuff)

The cvs :ext: and :pserver: problem is due to obscurity more than
anything else, IMO. The scheme above at least gives hints about
what's going on, and gives hints to people debugging. It might
actually be an asset.

I don't actually feel strongly for this point (see above), but
I do think this argument needs to be made.

Regards

Kieran

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jul 31 22:50:54 2002