On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 15:33, Max Bowsher wrote:
> I'm mainly including it to cover the possibility of multiple related servers
> which can be accessed both by http: or https:.
> Since RFC 2396 assigns a specific meaning to this format, we wouldn't want
> to use it for something non-standard, so we aren't losing anything by
> implementing it.
I wouldn't get too hung up on the relative-URL standard if it doesn't
meet our needs. We already have a syntax in the command-line client for
URL-or-path which doesn't follow the relative-URL standard; I would be
more concerned with consistency with that syntax (where it makes sense,
e.g. if we add a syntax for repository-relative paths to the client)
than with a web standard which doesn't really do what we want.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Jan 25 04:32:27 2005