On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> It was civil until CMike got on his
> high horse- you need to police yourselves
> a bit better before you start accusing
> outsiders of misbehavior- that's how civility
> starts degrading in a project.
Woah, there must be some different wavelengths in this conversation.
I didn't see any high horse in CMike's response. I found his response
exactly to the point (pointing out that 'relocate' is the wrong action
here, and that there is a need for a 'switch' (or for 'update'
following moves of the working copy root, which is another way of
putting it), and that's not a feature we currently have).
Or maybe you're referring to his mention of "chatter in this thread"
(which was, frankly, quite true, because of the sheer amount of posts
-- but I wouldn't take that as offensive), or of "a giant waste of
time and energy" (which sadly seems to be also true, however bad that
sounds). Nothing uncivil AFAICS.
> The fact is that a robust solution involves
> coding this up as part of the generic exception
> handling mechanics for whatever svn ops can deal
> with 301s. What's currently in 1.7 that we're
> pretending automates the redirect problem is inadequate
> for any serious svn http server administrator trying
> to track moves. This is not an idle question-
> Daniel actually tried putting a Redirect block
> in for the openejb -> tomee rename and all it wound
> up doing is destroying any attempts to crawl
> the project's pre-move history. We had to back
> out the change just to let our git-svn mirror
> pick up the new tomee location and DTRT with the
> history.
Sure, it's a genuine feature request (though you're the first one
bringing this up AFAIK), but it's simply not a feature of svn at the
moment. Please allow for some discussion (which includes pointing out
that this might not be as simple as you think it is), before accusing
some of as of being dicks.
And, now that we arrived at the conclusion that this has nothing to do
with the 1.7 feature of "automatic relocate on redirect": no this is
not a feature we ostensibly support, this is something quite
different.
--
Johan
Received on 2013-02-05 20:33:34 CET