You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com> on 2011/05/19 11:26:49 UTC

WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

A WC format bump is imminent, in order to rename the pristine text files
from '<SHA1>' to '<SHA1>.pristine', as discussed in the thread 'Add
".svn-base" suffix to the pristine files in 1.7' started by Konstantin
Kolinko on 2011-05-18,
<http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-05/0583.shtml>.

- Julian

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com>.
Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 05:26, Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> > A WC format bump is imminent, in order to rename the pristine text files
> > from '<SHA1>' to '<SHA1>.pristine', as discussed in the thread 'Add
> > ".svn-base" suffix to the pristine files in 1.7' started by Konstantin
> > Kolinko on 2011-05-18,
> > <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-05/0583.shtml>.
> 
> I would prefer that the bump is coordinated with Bert's work.
> 
> Yes, bumps are easier. But they also introduce a bit of pain when
> moving forward and back on dev versions. There is no rush to make this
> happen, so let's just do both at once.

OK, that works for me too.  I'll put the code in format 29 along with
Bert's externals changes, and commit everything except bumping the
number itself, so it can be reviewed and tested in advance of enabling
it.

- Julian

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 05:26, Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> A WC format bump is imminent, in order to rename the pristine text files
> from '<SHA1>' to '<SHA1>.pristine', as discussed in the thread 'Add
> ".svn-base" suffix to the pristine files in 1.7' started by Konstantin
> Kolinko on 2011-05-18,
> <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-05/0583.shtml>.

I would prefer that the bump is coordinated with Bert's work.

Yes, bumps are easier. But they also introduce a bit of pain when
moving forward and back on dev versions. There is no rush to make this
happen, so let's just do both at once.

Cheers,
-g

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by Johan Corveleyn <jc...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
<ju...@erenkrantz.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com> wrote:
>> Oh, it looks like the choice of name
>>
>>  '<SHA1>.pristine'
>>
>> was not discussed in that thread.  Two or three of us thought that
>> seemed like a sensible choice of name.  The other reasonable option is
>> to keep the old extension so that the new names would be
>>
>>  '<SHA1>.svn-base'
>>
>> The advantage would be that if anyone has already set up their tools to
>> filter out '*.svn-base' they wouldn't have to change that configuration.
>>
>> Any opinions?
>
> +1 for .svn-base.  No need to change just to change it.  -- justin

+1 too. There is no need to change this. It's a very tiny step in
backwards-compatibility, but it doesn't cost anything either.

-- 
Johan

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by Konstantin Kolinko <kn...@gmail.com>.
2011/5/19 Hyrum K Wright <hy...@hyrumwright.org>:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
> <ju...@erenkrantz.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com> wrote:
>>> Oh, it looks like the choice of name
>>>
>>>  '<SHA1>.pristine'
>>>
>>> was not discussed in that thread.  Two or three of us thought that
>>> seemed like a sensible choice of name.  The other reasonable option is
>>> to keep the old extension so that the new names would be
>>>
>>>  '<SHA1>.svn-base'
>>>
>>> The advantage would be that if anyone has already set up their tools to
>>> filter out '*.svn-base' they wouldn't have to change that configuration.
>>>
>>> Any opinions?
>>
>> +1 for .svn-base.  No need to change just to change it.  -- justin
>
> +1 for .pristine, just to spite Justin. :P
>

I think svn-base is better, because it is explicit that it belongs to
svn software, while "pristine" is just an English word.

By the way, thank you Julian and others for your work on this.

> But really, we've completely rewritten where all the metadata and
> pristines are stored, and now we're debating a hidden file extension?
> Just do the work and be done with it.

Best regards,
Konstantin Kolinko

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by Hyrum K Wright <hy...@hyrumwright.org>.
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
<ju...@erenkrantz.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com> wrote:
>> Oh, it looks like the choice of name
>>
>>  '<SHA1>.pristine'
>>
>> was not discussed in that thread.  Two or three of us thought that
>> seemed like a sensible choice of name.  The other reasonable option is
>> to keep the old extension so that the new names would be
>>
>>  '<SHA1>.svn-base'
>>
>> The advantage would be that if anyone has already set up their tools to
>> filter out '*.svn-base' they wouldn't have to change that configuration.
>>
>> Any opinions?
>
> +1 for .svn-base.  No need to change just to change it.  -- justin

+1 for .pristine, just to spite Justin. :P

But really, we've completely rewritten where all the metadata and
pristines are stored, and now we're debating a hidden file extension?
Just do the work and be done with it.

-Hyrum

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> Oh, it looks like the choice of name
>
>  '<SHA1>.pristine'
>
> was not discussed in that thread.  Two or three of us thought that
> seemed like a sensible choice of name.  The other reasonable option is
> to keep the old extension so that the new names would be
>
>  '<SHA1>.svn-base'
>
> The advantage would be that if anyone has already set up their tools to
> filter out '*.svn-base' they wouldn't have to change that configuration.
>
> Any opinions?

+1 for .svn-base.  No need to change just to change it.  -- justin

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .svn-base

Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com>.
I (Julian Foad) wrote:
> Thanks everyone.  The consensus is for ".svn-base" so that's what I'll
> use.

r1125455 adds the code.

- Julian

[...]
> Also a reminder of what we agreed elsewhere in this thread: we'll
> combine this format bump with the one Bert's doing for externals.

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .svn-base [was: ... renaming pristines to .pristine]

Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com>.
Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Bob Archer <Bo...@amsi.com> wrote:
> >> On 05/19/2011 11:34 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> >> > Oh, it looks like the choice of name
> >> >
> >> >   '<SHA1>.pristine'
[...]
> >> >   '<SHA1>.svn-base'
[...]
> >> +1 for <SHA1>.svn-base
> >
> > <SHA1>.svn-base
> 
> Yes. Just wanted to add [...]

Thanks everyone.  The consensus is for ".svn-base" so that's what I'll
use.

(I changed the subject line to reflect this, to aid with searching the
email archives in future.)

Also a reminder of what we agreed elsewhere in this thread: we'll
combine this format bump with the one Bert's doing for externals.

- Julian

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by Johan Corveleyn <jc...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Bob Archer <Bo...@amsi.com> wrote:
>> On 05/19/2011 11:34 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 11:26 +0200, Julian Foad wrote:
>> >> A WC format bump is imminent, in order to rename the pristine
>> text
>> >> files from '<SHA1>' to '<SHA1>.pristine', as discussed in the
>> thread
>> >> 'Add ".svn-base" suffix to the pristine files in 1.7' started by
>> >> Konstantin Kolinko on 2011-05-18,
>> >> <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-05/0583.shtml>.
>> >
>> > Oh, it looks like the choice of name
>> >
>> >   '<SHA1>.pristine'
>> >
>> > was not discussed in that thread.  Two or three of us thought
>> that
>> > seemed like a sensible choice of name.  The other reasonable
>> option is
>> > to keep the old extension so that the new names would be
>> >
>> >   '<SHA1>.svn-base'
>> >
>> > The advantage would be that if anyone has already set up their
>> tools
>> > to filter out '*.svn-base' they wouldn't have to change that
>> configuration.
>>
>> +1 for <SHA1>.svn-base
>
> I always like to name temp files and temp backups *.bob... since it is my name and easy to type, find and remember... so I vote for....
>
> <SHA1>.svn-base

Yes. Just wanted to add that this might be important for anti-virus
configurations (excluding certain extensions, which may be a
corporate-wide setting / centrally maintained and pushed to users'
desktops, ...). So to save those sysadmins and endusers some trouble,
I think keeping .svn-base would be best.

(I voted already, but wanted to explicitly point this out)

-- 
Johan

RE: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by Bob Archer <Bo...@amsi.com>.
> On 05/19/2011 11:34 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 11:26 +0200, Julian Foad wrote:
> >> A WC format bump is imminent, in order to rename the pristine
> text
> >> files from '<SHA1>' to '<SHA1>.pristine', as discussed in the
> thread
> >> 'Add ".svn-base" suffix to the pristine files in 1.7' started by
> >> Konstantin Kolinko on 2011-05-18,
> >> <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-05/0583.shtml>.
> >
> > Oh, it looks like the choice of name
> >
> >   '<SHA1>.pristine'
> >
> > was not discussed in that thread.  Two or three of us thought
> that
> > seemed like a sensible choice of name.  The other reasonable
> option is
> > to keep the old extension so that the new names would be
> >
> >   '<SHA1>.svn-base'
> >
> > The advantage would be that if anyone has already set up their
> tools
> > to filter out '*.svn-base' they wouldn't have to change that
> configuration.
> 
> +1 for <SHA1>.svn-base

I always like to name temp files and temp backups *.bob... since it is my name and easy to type, find and remember... so I vote for....

<SHA1>.svn-base

(not sure my vote counts, I'm just an interested bystander not a committer.)


*.BOb

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by "C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>.
On 05/19/2011 11:34 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 11:26 +0200, Julian Foad wrote:
>> A WC format bump is imminent, in order to rename the pristine text files
>> from '<SHA1>' to '<SHA1>.pristine', as discussed in the thread 'Add
>> ".svn-base" suffix to the pristine files in 1.7' started by Konstantin
>> Kolinko on 2011-05-18,
>> <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-05/0583.shtml>.
> 
> Oh, it looks like the choice of name
> 
>   '<SHA1>.pristine'
> 
> was not discussed in that thread.  Two or three of us thought that
> seemed like a sensible choice of name.  The other reasonable option is
> to keep the old extension so that the new names would be
> 
>   '<SHA1>.svn-base'
> 
> The advantage would be that if anyone has already set up their tools to
> filter out '*.svn-base' they wouldn't have to change that configuration.

+1 for <SHA1>.svn-base

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand

RE: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by Bert Huijben <be...@qqmail.nl>.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ivan Zhakov [mailto:ivan@visualsvn.com]
> Sent: donderdag 19 mei 2011 11:39
> To: Julian Foad
> Cc: Subversion Development
> Subject: Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to
> <SHA1>.pristine
> 
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:34, Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 11:26 +0200, Julian Foad wrote:
> >> A WC format bump is imminent, in order to rename the pristine text files
> >> from '<SHA1>' to '<SHA1>.pristine', as discussed in the thread 'Add
> >> ".svn-base" suffix to the pristine files in 1.7' started by Konstantin
> >> Kolinko on 2011-05-18,
> >> <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-05/0583.shtml>.
> >
> > Oh, it looks like the choice of name
> >
> >  '<SHA1>.pristine'
> >
> > was not discussed in that thread.  Two or three of us thought that
> > seemed like a sensible choice of name.  The other reasonable option is
> > to keep the old extension so that the new names would be
> >
> >  '<SHA1>.svn-base'
> >
> > The advantage would be that if anyone has already set up their tools to
> > filter out '*.svn-base' they wouldn't have to change that configuration.
> >
> > Any opinions?
> >
> [bikeshed] May be '<SHA1>.svn-pristine' ?

+1 on .svn-bikeshed

:-)

(I don't care, as long as it is somehow a unique enough suffix)

	Bert

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by Ivan Zhakov <iv...@visualsvn.com>.
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:34, Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 11:26 +0200, Julian Foad wrote:
>> A WC format bump is imminent, in order to rename the pristine text files
>> from '<SHA1>' to '<SHA1>.pristine', as discussed in the thread 'Add
>> ".svn-base" suffix to the pristine files in 1.7' started by Konstantin
>> Kolinko on 2011-05-18,
>> <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-05/0583.shtml>.
>
> Oh, it looks like the choice of name
>
>  '<SHA1>.pristine'
>
> was not discussed in that thread.  Two or three of us thought that
> seemed like a sensible choice of name.  The other reasonable option is
> to keep the old extension so that the new names would be
>
>  '<SHA1>.svn-base'
>
> The advantage would be that if anyone has already set up their tools to
> filter out '*.svn-base' they wouldn't have to change that configuration.
>
> Any opinions?
>
[bikeshed] May be '<SHA1>.svn-pristine' ?


-- 
Ivan Zhakov

Re: WC format bump imminent - renaming pristines to .pristine

Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com>.
On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 11:26 +0200, Julian Foad wrote:
> A WC format bump is imminent, in order to rename the pristine text files
> from '<SHA1>' to '<SHA1>.pristine', as discussed in the thread 'Add
> ".svn-base" suffix to the pristine files in 1.7' started by Konstantin
> Kolinko on 2011-05-18,
> <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-05/0583.shtml>.

Oh, it looks like the choice of name

  '<SHA1>.pristine'

was not discussed in that thread.  Two or three of us thought that
seemed like a sensible choice of name.  The other reasonable option is
to keep the old extension so that the new names would be

  '<SHA1>.svn-base'

The advantage would be that if anyone has already set up their tools to
filter out '*.svn-base' they wouldn't have to change that configuration.

Any opinions?

- Julian