On Jun 19, 2013, at 12:08 , Philip Martin wrote:
> Philip Martin <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com> writes:
>
>> Ben Reser <ben_at_reser.org> writes:
>>
>>> I don't imagine it'd take very long at all to implement but the
>>> problem of course is that we really should think carefully how we go
>>> about doing this. If we can detect this at runtime we probably
>>> should.
>>
>> I don't see how Subversion can determine that one script needs a
>> terminal while another can use a file, only the user knows that.
>>
>> It's also hard to fix 1.8, how do we pass the information into the
>> client library without changing the API? Perhaps we could recognise a
>> special part of the command name or a special external parameter, so
>>
>> --diff-cmd svn:interactive:myscript
>>
>> or
>>
>> --diff-cmd myscript -x svn:interactive
>>
>> gets a terminal while
>>
>> --diff-cmd myscript
>>
>> gets a file.
>
> Or we could extend the opaque svn_stream_t to make the underlying
> apr_file_t available. Is mixing output to the file and output to
> the stream acceptable or does it introduce output order problems?
I tried & installed both your patches and both work just fine, thank you very much.
Without giving it much thought, I now went for your second patch (it seemed to be the more sophisticated one).
I think something like the "-x svn:interactive" option would be the best solution, since that way the diff-cmd really
just remains a command.
Thank you very much for your quick help! I'll definitely keep tabs on the development of this, I hope that one way
or another it will make it into the svn code base.
Michael
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on 2013-06-19 17:38:39 CEST