Vlad Georgescu wrote:
> Blair Zajac wrote:
>> Proposal
>> ========
>>
>> 1) Be as RFC 3986 compliant as we can.
>>
>> 2) The relative URLs are:
>>
>> relative to current directory
>> ../../branches/1.4.x
>
> Since r23746 we support both "URL TARGET_DIR" and "TARGET_DIR URL" in
> externals definitions, so using relative paths for URLs might be ambiguous.
We could only support the new relative URLs in the new "URL TARGET_DIR",
or make the "-r N" mandatory in the new scheme to disambiguate them.
>
>> relative to repository root
>> ^branches/1.4.x
>
> This is somewhat bikesheddy, but I'd very much prefer '//' to '^' for
> this purpose, for at least three reasons:
>
> 1) ^ is not really a forbidden character in paths, so again, there's
> potential for ambiguity
True, but using ^ at the front of a path is very rare.
> 2) // is easier to type and feels less 'magic'; this is important if we
> are going to use the same syntax on the command line
But this has known meaning for the RFC.
> 3) there are already people building wrappers around svn with exactly
> this syntax: http://code.google.com/p/gvn/
>
>> relative to server root
>> /svn/repos/branches/1.4.x
Well, svk has a different meaning for //, so that gvn uses it doesn't
mean another one has to.
> Do we really need this? We can refer to paths in the same repository
> using the syntax above, and to paths in other repositories on the same
> server using //../some_other_project/foo/bar (since repositories usually
> have a common parent path).
>
>> relative to scheme
>> //svn.collab.net/svn/repos/branches/1.4.x
>>
>
> I guess I don't really see the point for this one either.
For completeness :)
Regards,
Blair
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jul 20 05:41:24 2007