Hyrum K Wright wrote on Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 13:57:28 +0000:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Daniel Shahaf <danielsh_at_elego.de> wrote:
> > Philip Martin wrote on Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 13:45:49 +0000:
> >> Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Philip Martin
> >> > <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> >> >> Is that sufficient? Given three files "foo", "FOO" and "Foo", one in
> >> >> wc.db, one on disk and one on the command line, is that the same file?
> >> >> Add another "fOO" to the database. It's now ambiguous?
> >> >
> >> > No, it's not:
> >>
> >> Is that answering the first question "same file?" or the second question
> >> "ambiguous?" or both?
> >>
> >> >
> >> > - Both fOO and foo exist in wc.db.
> >> > - FOO is on disk.
> >> > - I invoke 'svn <subcommand> Foo':
> >> > 1. Is there a case-exact match in wc.db? No
> >> > 2. Ok, then apply truepath-ing: so the user is meaning FOO.
> >> >
> >> > But the user can still do useful things to fOO and foo, if he gives
> >> > the exact correct casing.
> >>
> >> What about the first bit.
> >>
> >> Given three files "foo", "FOO" and "Foo", one in
> >> wc.db, one on disk and one on the command line, is that the same file?
> >>
> >> My understanding is that a Windows user expects those to be the same
> >> file. So "svn st FOO", "svn st foo" and "svn st Foo" all refer to the
> >> file in wc.db and the file on disk even though the cases don't match.
> >
> > But normal windows programs don't have the concept of "one on disk and
> > one in wc.db". And I imagine we want to have some syntax to refer to the
> > latter.
>
> @WORKING ?
I'm not sure this addresses the question of 'what object is identified
by the the stem (ie, path sans peg)'. Perhaps wc.db:/FOO? (using the
pseudo-drive syntax, so this isn't currently in use for anythin)
Received on 2012-01-24 15:04:21 CET