On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 22:34 +0100, Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Brian W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 08:42 +0100, Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> > > In addition to Philip's review:
> > >
> > > > Modified: branches/locking/subversion/clients/cmdline/unlock-cmd.c
> > > > Url: http://svn.collab.net/viewcvs/svn/branches/locking/subversion/clients/cmdline/unlock-cmd.c?view=diff&rev=13359&p1=branches/locking/subversion/clients/cmdline/unlock-cmd.c&r1=13358&p2=branches/locking/subversion/clients/cmdline/unlock-cmd.c&r2=13359
> > > > ==============================================================================
> > > > --- branches/locking/subversion/clients/cmdline/unlock-cmd.c (original)
> > > > +++ branches/locking/subversion/clients/cmdline/unlock-cmd.c Thu Mar 10 15:52:46 2005
> > > > @@ -54,7 +54,10 @@
> > > > svn_error_t *err;
> > > > struct lock_baton *lb = baton;
> > > >
> > > > - err = svn_cmdline_printf (lb->pool, _("Unlocked '%s'.\n"), path);
> > > > + if (ra_err)
> > > > + err = svn_cmdline_printf (lb->pool, _("Error: %s\n"), ra_err->message);
> > > > + else
> > > > + err = svn_cmdline_printf (lb->pool, _("Unlocked '%s'.\n"), path);
> > > >
> > > Dito. Also, should we put the path a the beginning of the line to be
> > > consistentwith the lock command? (I know who wrote that linte in the first
> > > place, just came to think of it now that I reread it:-)
> >
> > I like seeing the error first as I think it stands out more.
> >
> OK, I was unclear. I was referring to that last line, indicating success.
> 'foobar' locked by user...
> versus
> Unlocked 'foobar'
Ah. Hmm. I'm OK with that.
-Fitz
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Mar 11 22:46:50 2005