On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 09:30 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> VK Sameer wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 21:07 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> >>>VK Sameer <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> >>>>+ err = handle_auth_request(sess, pool);
> >>>>+ /* Pre-1.3 servers don't support 'lock-many'. If that fails, fall back
> >>>>+ * to 'lock'. */
> >>>>+ if (err && err->apr_err == SVN_ERR_RA_SVN_UNKNOWN_CMD &&
> >>>>+ strcmp (err->message, "Unknown command 'lock-many'") == 0)
> >>>>+ return ra_svn_lock_compat(session, path_revs, comment, force, lock_func,
> >>>>+ lock_baton, pool);
> >>(I'm chipping in with no knowledge again.) Is it really necessary and
> >>appropriate to do a string comparison of the error message text? It appears to
> >>me that just testing the error code would be sufficient.
> > I don't have a strong opinion on this. It is mainly (ultra-?) defensive
> > programming for a garbled marshalling/unmarshalling situation. If that
> > seems far-fetched, I'll take it out.
> That does seem far-fetched.
> The way I think about issues like this is to imagine two Subversion systems
> side by side, one that includes this test, and the other identical except that
> it does not. I ask myself, "Is there any situation in which the former would
> behave better than the latter?"
> In this case I can't imagine any such situation. If a server responds to
> "lock-many" with UNKNOWN_CMD:"Some unexpected text", it must be a communication
> error or a broken server or a customised server (e.g. translated into another
> language). If the communication or the server is broken, I can't imagine how
> attempting a plain "lock" could do any more harm. If it is a customised
> server, then we really want to attempt the plain "lock". Therefore I believe
> this comparison (and the similar one for "unlock") should not be present.
OK, I've removed the strcmp's in latest edition of the patch.
Thanks for the use cases.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Wed Jul 6 12:33:25 2005