On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> On 9/18/06, Daniel Rall <dlr@collab.net> wrote:
> >On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> >
> >> On 9/16/06, D.J. Heap <djheap@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Allow http auth protocols to be configurable.
> >> >
> >> >Neon 0.26 added support for selecting the auth protocols to
> >> >use. This change takes advantage of that support to
> >> >allow the user to specify the auth protocols they want to use
> >> >if they have a new enough neon.
> >> >
> >> >The default protocols if no config is specified are basic and
> >> >digest for http, or basic, digest and negotiate for https.
> >>
> >> What should this do with versions of Neon other than 0.26? Should we
> >> just silently ignore the configuration options?
> >>
> >> Also, your indenting is off in this section:
> >
> >Yesterday I re-indented the patch, and discussed some naming changes
> >with djh on IRC. I successfully tested the adjustd patch on Linux
> >with Neon 0.25.5 and 0.26.1.
...
> I don't have any objection, but I would prefer that we #ifdef the
> additions to the config file based on Neon version, so that we don't
> stick options in there if they can't possibly do any good. This is
> how the SASL code does it, for example.
I'd be okay with that. Though, if you carry your Subversion config
file between machines with different versions of Neon, or upgrade your
Neon on your machine (or an administrator does it for you), you might
never know about the option. Perhaps it would be better to include
the minimum library version information right there in the config file
instead?
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Mon Sep 18 19:22:00 2006