> It seems to me that, if 90% of the changes are EBCDIC, then as far as
> SVN is concerned, the changes for OS/400 support are incidental.
It doesn't really matter to me either way. I just wanted to put it out
there. I suppose if the OS/400 port was able to move in a non-EBCDIC
direction then it wouldn't really be a "port" any more anyway and I would
just be able to use trunk.
I just do not want to give the impression that if there is some other
EBCDIC system out there that it will just be load and go. This is very
much an OS/400 port. We have tried to condition code that we think is
OS/400 specific with #if AS400 but there is a lot of gray area, especially
in the DAV stuff. IBM actually converts all of the UTF-8 in the DAV
requests to EBCDIC and to do so it uses an invented espacing mechanism that
I have no reason to believe another EBCDIC system would do the same. There
are other places where we have made decisions, as experienced OS/400 users,
how we think it ought to work. For example, all of the svnlook commands
output UTF-8 as opposed to EBCDIC. The "svn" commands that we have ported
so far do the same. We think an OS/400 user would normally use these in
scripts, so keeping in UTF-8 makes a lot of sense. The output can always
be piped through iconv if you want to see it in EBCDIC.
Anyway, those are just some quick examples.
Mark
_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
_____________________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Apr 2 21:32:26 2005