Re: [PATCH] Implement svnadmin verify --force
From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 14:08:23 +0000 (GMT)
Prabhu Gnana Sundar <prabhugs_at_collab.net> wrote:
>> [...] We should choose either "notification" style
Oh... Why did you choose that and not C-Mike Pilato's follow-up suggestion?
> But, I am also adding one more error message as follows
Great, that sounds good, apart from what somebody suggested about changing the wording to something like 'failed to verify'.
> The default behaviour is not at all affected.
I think when --keep-going is false we should still emit this new error -- in addition to whatever it already emitted. That would change the existing behaviour a bit, but I think in a good way, because it would be more consistent.
> Attaching the patch for you to have a look at it.
The log message helps people to review the patch, by explaining the reason for the changes. Sorry, but I am not willing to review your patch without a log message.
Also, it would
> I am facing a few issues in it.
Yes, it is OK to tweak the expectations of existing tests when we change some details of the existing behaviour.
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.