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

Re: svn revision r0 question

From: Barry Scott <barry_at_barrys-emacs.org>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 08:40:05 +0100

On Sep 27, 2008, at 21:35, C. Michael Pilato wrote:

> Blair Zajac wrote:
>> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>> Blair Zajac wrote:
>>>> I'm not saying people can't modify it, that's fine, I'm saying,
>>>> why are
>>>> we allowing people to remove it? There's a lot of tools that
>>>> presume
>>>> the existence of svn:date.
>>>
>>> I think we can pretty much guarantee that every tool that
>>> presumes the
>>> existence of svn:date was conceived and composed after svn:date
>>> -- by
>>> virtue
>>> of being implemented as a mutable, unversioned revision property --
>>> was made
>>> optional. This project needn't bear the responsibility for
>>> decisions
>>> made
>>> by others who weren't diligent enough to check their assumptions
>>> against
>>> reality.
>>
>> Where does it say that? Even I was surprised to see that its
>> optional
>> and I work on this project :) I wouldn't fault other projects from
>> making the same assumption.
>
> Allow me to turn this around on you: where does "it" say "that"
> 'svn:date'
> will always be around?

Ouch... I'll bring my lawyer to check the API contacts with me next
time.

This is a surprise to me.

svn:log I can default to ""
svn:author I can default to ""
svn:date is going need thinking about.

Barry

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-09-28 09:41:13 CEST

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