John Peacock wrote:
> Max Bowsher wrote:
>> I propose that we need to sort out whether issue 890 (custom keywords)
>> requires any extended syntax in svn:keywords before we proceed with
>> keyword canonicalisation.
>
> Having spent a lot of time thinking about custom keywords over the past
> year, this patch in no way interferes with anything we do about custom
> keywords (IMHO). It is strictly about fixing the misfeature that the
> contents of svn:keywords aren't case-sensitive and the keywords inside
> files are.
> Any custom keyword handling should be overlayed on top of the existing
> keywords, not relying on specialized syntax within svn:keywords. Custom
> keywords are almost certainly going be deeply involved with issue #1974
> (and the others similar server side config issues).
>
> As long as the revised patch ignores all keywords that are not "core"
> then we are set for future expansion. At some point, the else{} that
> Madan added can be extended with a call to validate repository-defined
> keywords in addition to the builtin keywords, and old clients will not
> break (but they also won't get the custom keyword expansion).
Server side config seems to be far in the future, perhaps even 2.0.
Maybe we should discuss whether an interim implementation of custom
keywords, using svn:keywords, might be appropriate?
Something like:
svn propset svn:keywords 'Author Date Revision MyCustomKeyword="%D %U"' foo
?
I'm not saying that it is an ideal way to proceed, but it might be a viable
way of having custom keywords before server-side path-inheriting
configuration becomes a reality - which might be quite some way into the
future.
Max.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Apr 7 14:21:26 2005