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

AW: disregarding svn:global-ignores

From: Markus Schaber <m.schaber_at_codesys.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 07:40:40 +0000


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Paul Burba [mailto:ptburba_at_gmail.com]
> >> On 11/06/2012 10:29 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> >>> We have three ways of specifying ignores, and we have an option
> >>> that disregards them, only in one cammand it disregards all of the
> >>> ways and in two other commands the option only disregards two of
> >>> the ways. And we say "sure, that sounds perfect". It doesn't
> >>> sound fine to me, it sounds horrible.
> [ ...]
> The assumption on my part has been that if a repos admin sets
> svn:global-ignores on, say the root of their repos, then it means they are
> *really* serious about keeping those files out of their repos.

When an admin really is "really serious" about keeping files out of the
repository, then (s)he should use a pre-commit hook to prevent commit of
those files on the server side.

Client-Side ignore properties are never 100% safe:
- Commit in an updated subdirectory, where the parent directory has the
  property set, but the parent dir in the working copy still has an old
  revision without the property set.
- old client versions.
- autoversioning.
- svnkit.
- "hacked" / source-level customized clients.
- maybe svnmucc & co if they are not updated to honor those rules.

In my eyes, "ignored" != "forbidden".

The foolproof way would be to add a svn:global-forbidden property which is
checked on the server side, and aborts the commit. (Clients could use
that property as a fast-path check, additionally). AFAICS, such a beast
could be implemented as a hook script, but I could also imagine it in core

> >> But I've not been a huge fan of the idea of "server-dictated
> >> configuration" anyway, being more in favor of "repos-default
> >> configuration" or somesuch that doesn't pretend to be the final word
> >> on anything. With or without this feature in place, enforcement of
> >> ignores (and auto-props, for that matter) can only happen in the hook
> >> scripts, anyway, so I don't see the harm in allowing a user to
> >> specify --no-ignores if his or her admin doesn't care enough to
> >> enforce that the default configuration is honored.
> >
> > Right, +1 there.
> Well the beauty is that 1.8 isn't released yet! So I can change this
> easily enough. If I'm the lone voice in the wilderness on this then I'm
> happy to switch it so that --no-ignore works the same for svn:global-
> ignores as it does for the runtime config global-ignores and svn:ignore.

I'm neither a core developer, nor a sysadmin, but I tend to prefer
--no-ignore behaving the same for all 3 types of ignores, and using hooks
for "waterproof" blocking of files.

Best regards

Markus Schaber

CODESYS® a trademark of 3S-Smart Software Solutions GmbH

Inspiring Automation Solutions

3S-Smart Software Solutions GmbH
Dipl.-Inf. Markus Schaber | Product Development Core Technology
Memminger Str. 151 | 87439 Kempten | Germany
Tel. +49-831-54031-979 | Fax +49-831-54031-50

E-Mail: m.schaber@codesys.com | Web: http://www.codesys.com
CODESYS internet forum: http://forum.codesys.com

Managing Directors: Dipl.Inf. Dieter Hess, Dipl.Inf. Manfred Werner | Trade register: Kempten HRB 6186 | Tax ID No.: DE 167014915>
Received on 2012-11-07 10:20:21 CET

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