Greg Hudson <ghudson@mit.edu> writes:
> 3. Nuke the -D option, and consider dates to be a special syntax of
> revision names; perhaps they would need to be enclosed in
> brackets. So we'd have "-r '[2002-10-10]:23'" for the range {rev
> as of 2002-10-10} to {rev 23}. Of course, then all dates have to
> be shell-quoted, since shells are rather proprietary about the
> various kinds of brackets.
A huge +1 on using `-r' for both dates and revisions. That's a great
idea.
I think just doing "::" as the one-and-only separator would be fine,
and certainly preferable to any sort of bracket that would need shell
escaping. We could keep ":" as a valid separator for revisions for a
while, for compatibility... But nah, let's not bother. Better to
break a few scripts now than risk having to break more later.
However, +0 on a bracket- or brace-based solution too. Anything's
better than the status quo. (Do any shells require "{" and "}" to be
escaped? They seem to work fine for me. Actually, "[" seems fine too
when not in the command position, so perhaps it's not a problem...)
Whatever. I trust your judgement. +1 on Greg Hudson implementing
whatever he thinks is appropriate at this point :-).
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Oct 17 18:58:06 2002