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

Re: merging enchancement request

From: Philip Martin <philip_at_codematters.co.uk>
Date: 2003-01-09 21:05:43 CET

Karl Fogel <kfogel@newton.ch.collab.net> writes:

> John P N Pybus <john.pybus@zoology.oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> > Whichever naming scheme is chosen, it would be nice to form a pattern that
> > can be easily recognized by other tools. i.e. how would you use find to
> > recognise conflict files?
> Not only that, we need to use something that can be habituated to. If
> users can't predict the filename completion pattern (modulo the unique
> id portion in the middle), they'll be very frustrated.

I'd prefer Subversion to leave out the unique id portion unless it was
required to avoid a name clash. The unique id is fine for temporary
files, but has no place in a filename aimed at the user. It kills
tab-completion, is hard to type/remember if there are several, and
just makes the names longer.

> So I think a static set of strings for the ends of the filenames is a
> big win.

What problem does that solve? After all both 'svn info' and 'svn
status' will show the filenames.

Philip Martin
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jan 9 21:06:29 2003

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.