Stefan Sperling wrote on Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 21:32:24 +0100:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 09:14:42PM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> > That "blatant abuse" happens at least in two places that I'm aware of:
> > our tests, and Emacs vc-mode.
>
> There is a difference between scraping the cli output and having
> a program type answers into prompts. Do our tests really do the latter?
>
> Anyway, we can always add a --force-interactive option for such use.
>
> > And we'd hardly go to the trouble of keeping the command-line output
> > backwards-compatible if we didn't /expect/ people to drive svn this way.
>
> I'm generally opposed to favouring scriptability of the CLI over
> interactive use of the CLI.
>
> In this case, however, I'd like to make simple scripting easier by
> preventing the need to add --non-interactive to every invocation of
> 'svn' in a script. You can surely see the advantage of that, no?
Not sure. For unattended scripts, the only difference between passing
--non-interactive or not passing it is the error message they get, right?
I mean, if they pass it they will get "Cannot prompt because we aren't
interactive" (or is it "libsvn_auth has run out of username
providers"?), and if they don't pass it they will on stderr an "Should
I accept this SSL certificate?" prompt followed by an "End of file found on
stdin" error.
Received on 2012-12-18 00:56:50 CET