Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2005 kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>>>+ if (svn_path_is_url (common_parent))
>>>+ {
>>>+ url = common_parent;
>>>+ /* Unlocking a URL is pointless with the 'force' flag anyway, so
>>>+ just set it if we're operating on URLs. */
I think that comment was meant to say, "Trying to unlock a URL is pointless
_without_ the 'force' flag anyway, so just set it if we're operating on URLs."
Peter, if you're going to modify this code, perhaps you could fix the comment
at the same time.
>>>+ force = TRUE;
>>>+ }
>>
>>Because 'svn unlock URL' would never work without the 'force' flag
>>anyway, I just made that code run with 'force = TRUE' automatically.
>>
>>My reasoning was that if someone types 'svn unlock URL', then they
>>know what they meant to do, and there's no point making them type
>>'--force' every time (which of course they'd eventually habituate to).
>>
>
> OTOH, it will break other peoples' locks. Therefore, this usage should be
> uncommon enough that it isn't worht this inconsistency IMO. If I don't get
> objections, I may do that obvious tweak (probably before Karl gets
> back:-).
- Julian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Mar 15 03:12:14 2005