On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 08:19:54AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 9/12/06, Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-svn-dev@farside.org.uk> wrote:
> >On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 05:22:06PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> >> IMO, SVN shouldn't automatically update the WC with the new base.
> >>
> >
> >Why not? That would seem to be the perfect response to a permanent
> >redirect.
>
> Without asking the user first, it's a violation of the HTTP/1.1 RFC.
>
> RFC 2616 10.3.2 says:
> --
> If the 301 status code is received in response to a request other than
> GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the
> request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might
> change the conditions under which the request was issued.
>
That seems sensible - I'd forgotten that we weren't just dealing with
a GET at this point.
Regards,
Malcolm
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Sep 19 15:09:13 2006