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

RE: [PATCH] Implement svnadmin verify --force

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_vmoo.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 11:28:10 -0700

When the repository is ok, there is no behavior change. The only other
case in this usage is a fatal error path where performance is less
relevant because you exit... And even there you want as much detail as
possible.

Bert Huijben (Cell phone)
From: Julian Foad
Sent: 1-11-2012 18:26
To: Bert Huijben
Cc: Daniel Shahaf; Michael Pilato; Stefan Sperling; Prabhu Gnana Sundar
Ponnarasu; dev_at_subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement svnadmin verify --force
Bert Huijben wrote:

>> +1 to having a non-zero exit code if there was any error throughout.
>
> In that case: why do we add --force?

The option is called --keep-going.

> Maybe we should default to this new behavior and *add* a quick exit on error
> for whoever needs it.
>
> I think the total report on which revisions are broken is more informational
> than just the first error. And I don't like the '--force' for
> argument for
> continuing.

Near the start of this thread we mentioned the main use cases.  There
are basically two:

* Confirm that the repository is in a good state (e.g. before/after a backup);

* Diagnostic mode for use when a problem has been encountered.

Keep-going mode is more useful for the latter; stop-quickly mode *may*
be more useful (and is certainly fine) for the former.  So it's not
obvious that changing the default mode is a good idea.

- Julian
Received on 2012-11-01 19:28:44 CET

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