On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 7:17 AM, Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> wrote:
> On 30.07.2010 13:57, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> On 07/30/2010 03:55 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
>>> That approach just doesn't sound right to me. I've always understood
>>> that a temporary redirect implies that requests should always try the
>>> original first. Since there's no concept of a session in HTTP, you can't
>>> really assume anything about how long a redirect is valid -- it may be
>>> only for one single request and not for others.
>> What do you think Subversion should do when it encounters a temporary
>> redirect, then?
> Follow the redirect but not record the new URL in the working copy metadata.
Not being that familiar with the HTTP spec, this would be my gut
instinct as well. I see the analog with a typical web browser here.
When a browser gets a temporary redirect, it redirects, but usually
tries the original location the next time. For a permanent redirect,
a browser will often cache that information and go straight to the new
location. It feels like that's what we should be doing here.
-Hyrum (who doesn't envy Mike's position of being at the receiving end
of "design by committee")
Received on 2010-07-30 15:29:00 CEST