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

Re: svn commit: r1037738 - "Summary of updates"

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 10:33:37 -0500

On 11/25/2010 05:07 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> C. Michael Pilato wrote on Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 13:42:09 -0500:
>> when the targets are in or under ${CWD}, absolute paths otherwise, which
>> is the typical behavior of the command-line client notification code.)
>
> But what if the user specified a target, which is under `pwd`, using an
> absolute path? Do we want to notify this using an absolute path or
> a relative path?
>
> If we go with "make it absolute whenever it's outside cwd", then I think
> that (as you suggest, but not necessarily as it works right now) it
> makes sense to also do the opposite --- convert abspath to cwd-relative
> path if they happen to be under cwd.

I agree. I (think) I've done this in r1039072.

>> 2. Should "Skipped" items follow suit? (I say, "yes").
>
> +1

I did *not* do this yet. Right now, we get a mix of absolute and relative
paths passed through the notification system by client layer. I'm not
convinced (at all!) that this "mix" has been well-thought-out. I suspect
it's just in whatever state naturally evolved from our internal conversion
to abspaths everywhere. I'm wondering what would happen -- that is, how
much chaos would ensue -- if we changed subversion/svn/notify.c:notify() to,
in the case where n->path is not a URL, always first convert n->path to an
absolute path before doing the prefix removal stuff.

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand
Received on 2010-11-25 16:34:22 CET

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