Michael W Thelen wrote:
> Mathias Hasselmann wrote:
>>>>> This change might conflict with the changes of revision 14624.
>>>
>>> What do you mean by that? Do you need help to determine whether this
>>> change does conflict?
>>
>> Technically the can be a applied cleanly, but I don't know if this patch
>> violates Subversion's current design goals, as the log message for
>> revision 14624 says:
>>
>>
>> Remove the <prop> element from mod_dav_svn's XML DTD for GET.
>> It's not used and never will be, according to policy.
>>
>>
>> I was not aware of that log message, because I wrote the patch for
>> Subversion 1.1.4. Saw that log message first, when porting the patch
>> to Subversion's trunk.
>>
>> The question is: Is there a statement somewhere, that mod_dav_svn
>> should not be extended anymore, for more beautiful browser output? If
>> the answer is yes, then my patch might be a bad thing, otherwise I'd
>> consider it useful.
>
> Would a developer be willing to comment on whether Mathias' patch
> conflicts with Subversion design goals, and review the patch itself? If
> not, I'll file the patch in the issue tracker in the next day or two.
IMO, reasonable improvements to the XML directory lister that already exists do _not_ conflict with the goal of avoiding increased
code complexity.
However, this patch as-is has a problem, as property values could be binary data - they are certainly not constrained to utf8.
Max.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jun 22 00:00:07 2005