On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 10:01 -0500, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 09:28 -0500, Paul Burba wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 8:43 AM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
> >> >> A. Make "propget" print just the plain value with no header when there
> >> >> is only one target, like it used to, but use the new indented format
> >> >> when there are multiple targets. Remove the new use of "-v". (Leave
> >> >> "proplist" as it
> >> >
> >> > Do you mean "multiple targets" or "multiple targets with the named
> >> > property"? Actually, that's not even so very interesting. I guess I don't
> >> > like the idea that somebody might type:
> >> This is probably the same question as Mike's, but what would a
> >> recursive propget yield? The same indented output as with multiple
> >> targets right? I'd hate svn pg svn:mergeinfo -vR to return to the
> >> mess it was.
> > I mean whatever the plain (old-style and still default) "propget"
> > currently does,
> Ok, but that default style is really tough on the eyes when dealing
> with subtrees and mergeinfo. Run 'svn pg svn:mergeinfo -R' on [...]
Sorry, mis-communication there. I didn't mean a recursive propget would
print the old format, I meant a recursive propget would choose formatted
output instead of value-only output.
A. Make "propget" print just the plain value with no header when there
is only one target, like it used to, but use the new indented format
when there may be multiple results (e.g. with "-R" or multiple
command-line targets). Remove the new use of "-v". (Leave "proplist" as
But it looks like nobody particularly wants me to make that change.
As for Mike's comment about "proplist" format having changed with "no
public outcry", it hasn't been in a release yet...
Received on 2009-01-20 17:19:09 CET