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

Re: [PATCH] "simple" custom keywords implementation

From: John Peacock <jpeacock_at_rowman.com>
Date: 2004-06-14 01:33:31 CEST

Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Thanks, good point.. but is source or binary compatibility required?
> If the former, then the patch would still work simply by putting the APR
> array inside the svn_subst_keywords_t structure instead of replacing
> that structure.

If you'd read that section in HACKING, you would have been referred to this page:

        http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html

which makes it very clear that minor versions must be both source and binary
compatible with older minor versions. It took more than a little work on my
part to ensure what I was doing would manage that. In fact, if you look at the
issue 890 history, you'll see that I produced two patches:

1) which only replaces the core code in svn_subst (and associated include files)
so that all other internal Subversion code must operate correctly using the
compatibility functions; and

2) a patch which replaces all other internal Subversion code with the more
efficient direct calls to the new functions.

I'll take a look at your code to see if there is anything that I can incorporate
into what I have already done. I like the idea of equivalence between short and
long forms in svn:keywords; I think my code does that already but I want to make
sure.

As for the custom keyword portion, I think I'd rather work on a more general
solution than just creating aliases for the existing keywords. plasma's
original patch was intended to be used to permit generic keyword definitions
using a printf-style format string. The problem is still that there is no way
short of compile-time options (like you used) to create those custom keywords.
I'd much rather work on a way for the client to query the server for repository
specific keyword definitions, rather than hardcoding something.

At the very least, if there was a consensus that a hardcoded route was
acceptable for a short-term case, I would put that in an include file which
could incorporate the site-specific keywords. Actually, typing this out makes
me want to see how hard that would be to do...

John

-- 
John Peacock
Director of Information Research and Technology
Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group
4720 Boston Way
Lanham, MD 20706
301-459-3366 x.5010
fax 301-429-5747
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jun 14 01:33:46 2004

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.