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

Re: request to clarify and improve Subversion property name specification

From: Daniel Shahaf <danielsh_at_elego.de>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 18:29:18 +0200

Garret Wilson wrote on Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 06:31:19 -0800:
> On 1/29/2012 11:26 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> >...
> >
> >- Publish your "properties migration" code for others to reuse.
>
> Done:
>
> https://...

Thanks.

> >[1] If you answer "In a specification" I'll ask how it would relate to
> >the existing API docs.
>
> The mythical "Subversion Specification" is a completely different
> animal than an API specification. After all, there can be (and are)
> different APIs (e.g. DAV+SVN, JavaHL, SVNKit). The APIs should all
> follow the "Subversion Specification", which is agnostic to any API.
> One of the biggest disconnects in the Subversion community seems to
> be this idea that some source code comments of an API substitutes
> for a specification of Subversion itself---the framework.

The C API is not at equal standing with the wire protocol or SVNKit.

Yes, property names appear everywhere (all public API layers, in the
internals of every library), but the documentation of what is a valid
property name (beyond the type-safety) appears only in one place. That
could be improved.
Received on 2012-01-30 17:30:42 CET

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