Re: "svn log" options and semantics

Julian Foad said:
> So you are using non-incremental mode if the user asks for information about
> only one item, and the incremental mode if multiple items. And then you are
> parsing the XML output into a form suitable for display to the user. Is this
> correct?

Dead on. :)

> If you are able to use the "incremental" form, that means you don't need the
> header and footer, so you could use the incremental form always. I could
> remove the non-incremental form and the "--incremental" option, and make
> incremental output the default. (I'm not saying yet that I will remove it,
> but just checking that that wouldn't be a problem for you.)

Hmm. Actually, looking back and comparing the content, the --incremental
option was a little on the confusing side to me, when I was first working with
it.

It's not really proper XML. Even though it *IS* an XML fragment.

I ended up having to mimic the header and footer when the --incremental option
was picked, so that the standard xml parsers would understand what they were
looking at and parse the log entries correctly.

So if anything *had* to disappear in the --xml option, it would be the
--incremental option in my opinion. But I would definitely want to keep the
--xml option.

I think the --incremental option has a purpose, when collecting a large number
of fragments of log entries. But I don't think it makes that much of a hit for
my explorer.

It would be more useful to a statistical analysis tool which is still in the
minds of a few individuals on this list.

Your call - --incremental allows aggregation much faster than having to look
for the header and footer for every entry.

I vote we keep it for now, before we shoot ourselves in the foot by removing
it too soon.

> information, or _add_ information that is not being output by "svn log" at the

Add - you're right. Reduction is a no-brainer.

More specifically, I'm thinking aobut a standardized vocabulary of items that
can be handed out w/ the log request.

Eventually making the log and info functions almost the same, where info is
just a specific formatting option of log.

Or better yet a 'query' command that is a superset of both log and info where
log and info are formatting options....

Am I making any sense here???

-- 
Shamim Islam
BA BS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org