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

Re: Feature request: Vizualization of 'fsvs' properties.

From: Stefan Küng <tortoisesvn_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 11:26:29 +0200

Ph. Marek wrote:
> Hello Stefan!
>
> Stefan Küng <tortoisesvn <at> gmail.com> writes:
>> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 16:22, mmm4m5m <mmm4m5m <at> gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Feature request: Vizualization of 'fsvs' properties.
> ...
>>> Example how fsvs store meta data (like time, mode, owner, group):
>>>
>>>> $ svn proplist -v file://.../backup/fsvs/trunk/etc/adjtime
>>>> svn:text-time : 2008-08-12T13:36:21.000000Z svn:unix-mode :
>>>> 0644 svn:owner : 0 root svn:group : 0 root
>> And with those properties, the fsvs project violates the Subversion
>> guidelines. If they want to use properties, they *must not* use
>> svn: properties: those are reserved for Subversion.
> Well, these properties *do* come from (a branch) of the subversion
> libraries: the meta-data-branch. They were *designed* for use in
> subversion - the feature is just not accepted yet (and might never be
> - that's why FSVS was written).

So you're saying that now that FSVS has decided to implement something,
the Subversion developers have to kindly ask *them* whether they are
allowed to use the svn: properties they want for their feature?
Or if they want to use it, they have to do *exactly* the same as FSVS does?

Sorry, that's not a reason. The 'svn:' properties are for the Subversion
project *only*.

>
> That's why the "svn:" prefix is used in FSVS too - to be compatible
> with the meta-data branches of subversion!

You can't be compatible to something that's not finalized.

> See here for the definition - from line 192 on:
> http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/branches/meta-data-versioning/owner-group-mode/subversion/include/svn_props.h

I don't care about those: it's on a branch, not yet released. That means
it's subject to change.

>>> There is no one GUI fsvs client.
>>>
>>> These properties are less or more official.
>> No, they can't be.
> What would be needed to make properties "official"? Get some
> trademark? Come on, in the official subversion online repository
> browser you can see this names reserved - which is much more than can
> be said by a lot of other properties that are used by other
> utilities.

You don't get it. I don't care whether other tools misuse the svn:
properties too. If they do, that's their problem and I hope they will
get serious problems one day for doing so.
Why do you think TSVN introduced the tsvn: and bugtraq: properties? We
also could have used 'svn:' properties instead to 'encourage' other
clients to use the same ones. We didn't. Because it is not allowed. And
we follow the rules.

No, you don't need a trademark. To make these official, you'd have to
contact the Subversion devs and ask them to mark those properties as
final and documented in a release tag, not just in a design document on
an experimental branch.

> I hope I could convince you that they are not "illegal"; if I didn't
> manage that yet, just say so - then I'll to ask some core subversion
> developer about his opinion. Would that help?

It would help, yes. (btw: I'm a full committer on the Subversion project
too - and you couldn't convince me :)

Stefan

-- 
       ___
  oo  // \\      "De Chelonian Mobile"
 (_,\/ \_/ \     TortoiseSVN
   \ \_/_\_/>    The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
   /_/   \_\     http://tortoisesvn.net

Received on 2008-09-04 11:26:49 CEST

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