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

Re: svn commit: r1674628 - /subversion/branches/1.9.x/STATUS

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 18:21:09 +0000

Thanks for the explanation on why you prefer the tweak here. With that explanation feel free to add my +1. (Or I will add it myself later tonight).


Bert






Sent from Windows Mail





From: Greg Stein
Sent: ‎Sunday‎, ‎April‎ ‎19‎, ‎2015 ‎7‎:‎27‎ ‎PM
To: dev_at_subversion.apache.org







On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Branko Čibej <brane_at_wandisco.com> wrote:



On 19.04.2015 10:57, Bert Huijben wrote:




Why do you set the header if you can just set the parsed depth value even more locally as I did in my patch I sent as reply on the thread?


 The patch Greg and Stefan cooked up kicks in a lot earlier in the request processing flow, and by modifying the request record instead of some internal structure it's more future-proof. IMO, that's a good thing.



Well... Bert's patch sets depth=0 for ALL walks when the method is COPY. That is unsafe, as you don't know *why* the walk is being performed. We only want to disable a specific walk, and the Depth:0 header trick does exactly that.




To be fair, one day, if mod_dav ever decides to be strict about the Depth header matching the resource type (file vs dir), then this could break. But I don't see that happening, as it hasn't in over 15 years.




The patch that Stefan and I came up with is just moving Johan's "set Depth header" concept into code.




Hat tip to Johan for finding the workaround!




Cheers,

-g
Received on 2015-04-19 20:23:42 CEST

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.