On Wed, 18 Nov 2009, Branko Cibej wrote:
> Mike Samuel wrote:
>> 2009/11/17 Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu>:
>>
>>> Mike Samuel wrote:
>>>
>>>> Source code is explicitly not considered human readable.
>>>>
>>> Recalling some horrors I've had to review, I even tend to agree ... but
>>> it's a strange policy nonetheless. I wonder what kind of rationale they
>>> have for it.
>>>
>>
>> I think making a distinction between human readable content and source
>> code is fine. But the distinction was not made consistently from the
>> beginning so it's led to confusion.
>>
>> And if they're going to make such a distinction, usually it helps to
>> distinguish between source code that's meant to be read and source
>> code for a language that has no separate compilation stage that is
>> meant to be delivered to an interpreter. I think this echoes bsmith's
>> two flavors of XML in the previous thread.
>>
>> What do you think of the property name, "svn:merge-mode," and the
>> values ("none" "simple")?
>>
>
> The property name is descriptive enough, so is the "none"; don't have a
> quibble there. I do think "simple" is a bit too simple. :) It's a
> line-based contextual merge; dunno what would be a better short name for
> that, maybe "patch"?
Yeah, I thought the same.
What about "line-based"?
To me that sounds descriptive enough and not too long :)
Martin
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2419232
Received on 2009-11-18 01:19:19 CET