Re: non-interactive user authentication

Garrett Rooney <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> writes:
> > Please don't ... aargh, you already have. I think this was a bad
> > move. It's better to fix the code than to add yet another option: If
> > you already passed a --username and --password, or if your url is
> > http://user:pass@foo/..., then why on earth would you have to pass
> > --non-interactive to suppress the password dialogue, too? That just
> > doesn't make sense -- we're beginning to accumulate one-shot options
> > at an alarming rate. And not writing tests for them, may I add.
>
> FWIW, I agree. This option doesn't make much sense to me...

Hmmm, Brane's and your reasonings make sense to me. Wish I'd thought
that carefully before coding it up.

I'll revert the new-code portion of the change, while leaving the
documentation fixes (which were needed anyway).

Please note that, in general, I see nothing wrong with accumulating
one-shot options :-). This particular one is not necessary, though.

-Karl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Oct 7 07:57:42 2002