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

Re: [Issue 3913] "svnrdump load" is not working in interactive mode

From: Philip Martin <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 11:04:31 +0000

Branko Čibej <brane_at_wandisco.com> writes:

> On 18.03.2013 16:12, philip_at_tigris.org wrote:
>> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3913
>> ------- Additional comments from philip_at_tigris.org Mon Mar 18 08:12:42 -0700 2013 -------
>> The current behaviour is a deliberate design, see the log for r1424037. The
>> clients automatically switch to non-interactive when stdin is not a terminal as
>> that prevents scripts hanging in some circumstances and --force-interactive was
>> introduced to allow the user to override that decision.
> Given that there are several cases where this decision (to assume
> --non-interactive if stdin is not a terminal) may lead to somewhat
> unexpected behaviour, I propose the following:
> * Leave the --non-interactive assumption as it now stands. One could
> argue that, e.g., "svnrdump load" or "svnadmin load", which behave

Only svnrdump is affected, svnadmin doesn't prompt.

> like stream filters, should behave differently -- however, the
> purpose of the assume-non-interactive change was to avoid the cases
> where automated scripts would unexpectedly hang waiting for input
> (possibly, in the case of post-commit scripts, resulting in a minor
> DoS) instead of returning an error when, e.g., required credentials
> are not available. It is, in my opinion, much better overall to be
> consistent.
> * To mitigate the circumstance that users will now more often have to
> type --force-interactive on the command line, I propose we allocate
> one of our carefully-hoarded single-letter options for this
> behaviour. I propose -i, which aligns with similar options of
> standard unix tools, e.g., rm, cp, mv, expect, etc. Neither -i nor
> -I (an alternative, though less desirable spelling) are currently
> used by the command-line client.

The sort of cases where the user will have to type --force-interactive

    svn commit -F -
    svn propset --revprop -rN -F -
    svn commit --targets -
    svnmucc put -

Those look like commands that would be used in scripts rather than
interactively, I think it will be rare for the user to type one of those
and then have to type the long option --force-interactive. That leaves
"svnrdump load" as the single place a user will type the short option.
I can see "svnrdump load" being used from the command line but not
repeatedly the way one uses "svn commit". I'm not convinced a short
option is necessary.

> Note that I do /not/ propose that we similarly make -f an alias for
> --non-interactive, because the latter is much less likely to be used by
> command-line users than by scripts.

I note that svnmucc already has a short option -n as an alias for
--non-interactive. We are promoting svnmucc from "tools" to "bin" so I
think we should make it consistent with our other clients and get rid of
the anomalous -n.

Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
Received on 2013-03-20 12:05:21 CET

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.