On 12.12.2018 21:16, Stefan Kueng wrote:
> On 12.12.2018 21:12, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> On 12.12.2018 19:07, Stefan Kueng wrote:
>>> On 12.12.2018 13:55, TortoiseSVN-dev on behalf of Julian Foad wrote:
>>>>>> Subversion encountered a serious problem.
>>>>>> Please take the time to report this on the Subversion mailing list
>>>>> It is likely that this is a problem specific to TortoiseSVN, and not
>>>>> to core SVN. TortoiseSVN has its own mailinglists, so you should
>>>>> report your problem there:
>>> Since this happens in the project monitor, my best guess is that the
>>> path/url the user entered to be monitored is not correct.
>>>> It makes me sad every time I see this pattern. Software is often
>>>> frustrating to use, but should at least aim to be polite to its
>>>> users. Telling the user "Please do X" and then when the user does X
>>>> saying "No, it's no good doing X; do Y" is not polite, and I would
>>>> not expect anyone but the most calm, patient and helpful of users to
>>>> gracefully comply with such a request.
>>>> I'm not meaning to criticise Johan but rather our whole system.
>>>> Can we please fix this problem. Both:
>>>> 1) Tsvn please change the message.
>>> Sorry, won't do that. Because I've argued multiple times over the
>>> years here that calling exit() or even abort() in a library is the
>>> worst idea ever. Especially if this can happen by having the user
>>> enter a wrong path/url.
>> It's not the user entering the wrong path or URL. It's the code that
>> uses the Subversion libraries — in this case TSVN — not validating and
>> de-tainting its input. Yes, this has been going on for years due to your
> And as I repeatedly said: TSVN does validate the input as good as it
> can. But if svn does neither describe the *exact* specs in the docs
> nor provide any APIs that do that, then TSVN has to guess.
> And no: specifying that paths/uris have to be "canonicalized" is not
> enough because I do that, using the svn APIs.
> So apparently that's not enough.
Get one of the dumps the crash reporter is supposed to generate, then
show us a stack trace that shows there's a bug in the Subversion code,
and you'll get results. Waxing philosophical about how you believe a
library should behave is not productive.
These silly "Subversion Exception" mails are no help at all, they
provide exactly *zero* information on which anyone can act. And your
refusal to direct TSVN users to TSVN support lists is just bloody
annoying and hence also not productive. If there is a bug in our code,
which of course is possible, we can do exactly nothing about it given
the amount of info we have.
Oh by the way, I doubt this had anything to do with user input, as the
> got following exception at trying to start the tortoisesvn Project
> Monitor with a doubleclick on the tray icon.
P.S.: I keep wondering where these crash reports from all the other
Subversion clients out there are going. We don't seem to be seeing (m)any.
Received on 2018-12-12 21:47:29 CET