[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Objection to change in svn_depth_t component naming (r21067)

From: David Anderson <david.anderson_at_calixo.net>
Date: 2006-08-15 14:16:33 CEST

* Karl Fogel <kfogel@google.com> [2006-08-14 17:55:45]:
> Why would we assume that the DAV standard is more "established" than
> the LDAP one? We happen to be unusually familiar with DAV, but that's
> probably just a local bias...

You said it: Subversion has a local bias to use DAV terminology. If we
start mixing in LDAP terminology, wouldn't this result in more
confusion than anything else?

I also feel that the DAV terms are much more explicit than the LDAP
ones (could be that dav bias again). Does it not suffice if the
corresponding LDAP terms are documented in the design?

- Dave.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Aug 15 14:18:29 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.