Re: Conflict file naming

On Jan 5, 2006, at 19:31, Gale, David wrote:

> Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> foo.c
>> foo.c.r42.c
>> foo.c.r43.c
>> foo.c.mine.c
>> foo.h

[snip]

> The compromise gets rid of my complaints, but is cluttered. I
> wouldn't
> want that to be the default, either...or, again, if it were, I'd hope
> that there'd be an option where I could turn it off.

I don't totally mind the compromise. It is cluttered, but since it
solves all of your certainly valid observations, I'd accept it.

Though it is slighty silly to "gunzip foo.txt.gz.r42.gz" and end up
with "foo.txt.gz.r42" which is not, despite the hint in its name,
gzipped.

The only way I see around this silliness while still solving the
other problems we're trying to solve is as some have already
suggested, putting "r42" and such at the beginning of the filename,
possibly after a prefix like "svn-". I'm just pretty sure I dislike
that it would bunch all conflicted files together, and away from the
original files.

> Incidentally, which modern editors *can't* handle files with
> "uncanonical" extensions? Or is this request just for people who want
> to be able to double-click a "mine" file in Windows, and have it
> open in
> the appropriate tool?

I'd say it's purely for the latter. It's not just Windows, of course;
Mac OS X also decides which app to use based on file extension. Does
*nix not? Or do *nix people just always name the specific program
they want to use?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jan 5 21:12:58 2006