On 2/28/07, C. Michael Pilato <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> > Does anybody have any other comments on the backwards compatibility
> > implications here? I'm leaning toward the "this is just a little too
> > much breakage" side of the things (though I could be convinced otherwise
> > :), and I'm planning on putting this in the issue tracker for 2.0.
> What if we did the following (WARNING, I'm in a weird mood):
> I almost always mess up the setting of the svn:externals property the
> time because the order of the "arguments"...
> target-dir [-rM] http://.../path/to/checkout
> ...is exactly the opposite of the typical checkout command-line
> syntax. So
> what if we declared a new version of the syntax, that looked like this:
> http://.../path/to/checkout[@PEG-REV] [-rM] target-dir
> (or maybe)
> [-rM] http://.../path/to/checkout[@PEG-REV] target-dir
I like this one as it is obvious as to it being different (options first)
plus it very much matches the "usual" svn command line order.
Anyway, the point is that a) you'd be able to detect the new format using
> svn_path_is_url() checks on the arguments, and b) now folks can verify
> externals definitions by tacking them onto the end of 'svn checkout' at
> Thoughts? Tomatoes?
Actually, no tomatoes but a nice, large apple :-) To me, at least, this
would allow for backwards compatibility with older externals. The only
issue left is what this does to older clients. If it fails "cleanly" (no
pollution of the WC) then that is reasonable. I guess that it requires some
testing to validate that.
Michael Sinz Technology and Engineering Director/Consultant
"Starting Startups" mailto:Michael.Sinz@sinz.org
My place on the web http://www.sinz.org/Michael.Sinz
Received on Wed Feb 28 21:47:41 2007