Re: merging enchancement request

Philip Martin <philip@codematters.co.uk> writes:
> 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.

Absolutely agree. It was a way to avoid an edge case, and it gets
used prematurely (my fault for the overeagerness when I wrote it).

I think if we just fix svn_io_unique_file_name() to try extending the
basename first, without any unique id junk, that will do the trick.

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

I think I didn't explain what I meant very well.

The filenames should be predictable up to the point that distinguishes
them from each other; and these unique endings should make a good
compromise between informativeness and shortness, since one wants to
know what they mean, but also wants to minimize keystrokes.

It sounds like you share the same goals; I may have misunderstood your
original sub-url proposal.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jan 9 21:27:32 2003