On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 07:03 +0200, Branko ╚ibej wrote:
> * No-one answered the question whether log-message templates were
> really the top priority, compared to, e.g., server-side autoprops.
Who's supposed to "answer the question"? The discussion ended
inconclusively. Perhaps Karl should have called for a vote rather than
forging ahead; I don't know.
> * The overlap between log templates and server-side config was
> mentioned, then completely ignored as irrelevant.
You mean <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2005-05/0795.shtml>? How can
you possibly assert that this argument was "ignored as irrelevant?" I
replied with a counterargument (to which you replied with an ad hominem,
which I'm not happy about at all). Karl attempted to accomodate your
argument but backed away when I raised objections to his new proposal.
CMike seemed partly swayed by your argument. Fitz said he views log
templates and server->client configuration as apples and sausages.
Nowhere did anyone say that they were ignoring you or that it was
> * An awsomely sexy implementation was proposed to dynamically
> generate templates (and it can't possibly be reused for
> server-side configuration, but this fact was ignored as per
> above), but no-one even showed a pressing need for the sort of
> flexibility being offered. It's boiled down to a case of "let's do
> it because we can."
Being able to dynamically generate templates was listed as a side bonus.
Being able to *choose* templates using any desired logic, rather than a
fixed set of rules, was the primary motivation behind Karl's proposal.
And Karl arrived at the need for this flexibility by looking at what CVS
did, and deciding that its fixed ruleset was lacking and that it wasn't
clear how to make it better.
> I also find it *very* disturbing that no-one even analysed how log
> tempaltes could be used.
To me, this is pretty elementary, and it isn't disturbing at all that
people would skip past it.
> The implicit assumption is, "have SVN provide a
> tempalte for a commit log message". Based on this very general
> requirement, we have on the table a proposal doesn't address the case
> where you'd want to generate the template and write the log _before_
> running "svn commit". Which, at least for me, is the natural order of
No reason we couldn't provide an interface to produce the log template
without performing the commit. Then you'd edit the template and commit
with the -F flag, which wouldn't fetch a template at all.
You might argue that client-side template generation, using static data
obtained at checkout/update time, is better because it means you can
produce the template without being able to contact the server. If
that's the argument you want to make, just make it; there's no need to
attack the format of the discussion.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Thu May 19 07:40:02 2005