You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Philip Martin <ph...@codematters.co.uk> on 2005/11/10 00:07:46 UTC
Re: svn commit: r17277 - in trunk/subversion: include
libsvn_fs_base libsvn_repos libsvn_subr libsvn_wc
dionisos@tigris.org writes:
> Author: dionisos
> Date: Wed Nov 9 14:11:10 2005
> New Revision: 17277
> --- trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_files.c (original)
> +++ trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_files.c Wed Nov 9 14:11:10 2005
> @@ -1018,6 +1018,19 @@
> }
>
>
> +svn_error_t *
> +svn_wc__adm_write_version_file (const char *adm_path, apr_pool_t *pool)
> +{
> + return svn_io_write_version_file2
> + (extend_with_adm_name (adm_path, NULL, FALSE, pool,
> + SVN_WC__ADM_FORMAT, NULL),
> + SVN_WC__VERSION,
> + _(" DON'T EDIT FILES IN THIS AREA\n"
> + " MANUAL CHANGES WILL BREAK YOUR WORKING COPY\n\n"),
> + pool);
> +}
"Will" is too strong, manual changes *may* break the working copy but
it's not inevitable.
I think this warning is pointless. I'd be surprised is someone
who is considering editing the entries files is going to be put off by
a warning in the format file.
--
Philip Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r17277 - in trunk/subversion: include libsvn_fs_base
libsvn_repos libsvn_subr libsvn_wc
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@btopenworld.com>.
Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> On 11/10/05, Julian Foad <ju...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>
>>And what happened on the first "+" line in this diff hunk of the commit?
>
> Removal of a trailing space.
Sorry, it wasn't clear but I meant the diff hunk I quoted after the question:
> Index: subversion/include/svn_io.h
> ===================================================================
> --- subversion/include/svn_io.h (revision 17276)
> +++ subversion/include/svn_io.h (revision 17277)
> @@ -1021,10 +1021,23 @@
>
> /** Create (or overwrite) the file at @a path with new contents,
> * formatted as a non-negative integer @a version followed by a single
> - * newline. On successful completion the file will be read-only. Use
> + * newline. If @a comment is non-NULL, an aditional newline and On successful completion the file will be read-only. Use
> * @a pool for all allocations.
> But both maxb and djames had objections too. So, I guess I'll revert.
Oh, well, in that case it doesn't matter what happened to that comment.
- Julian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r17277 - in trunk/subversion: include libsvn_fs_base libsvn_repos libsvn_subr libsvn_wc
Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@collab.net>.
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> On 11/10/05, Julian Foad <ju...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> > Philip Martin wrote:
> > > dionisos@tigris.org writes:
> > >
> > >>Author: dionisos
> > >>Date: Wed Nov 9 14:11:10 2005
> > >>New Revision: 17277
> > >
> > >>--- trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_files.c (original)
> > >>+++ trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_files.c Wed Nov 9 14:11:10 2005
> >
> > >>+svn_error_t *
> > >>+svn_wc__adm_write_version_file (const char *adm_path, apr_pool_t *pool)
> > >>+{
> > >>+ return svn_io_write_version_file2
> > >>+ (extend_with_adm_name (adm_path, NULL, FALSE, pool,
> > >>+ SVN_WC__ADM_FORMAT, NULL),
> > >>+ SVN_WC__VERSION,
> > >>+ _(" DON'T EDIT FILES IN THIS AREA\n"
> > >>+ " MANUAL CHANGES WILL BREAK YOUR WORKING COPY\n\n"),
> > >>+ pool);
> > >>+}
> > >
> > > "Will" is too strong, manual changes *may* break the working copy but
> > > it's not inevitable.
> >
> > Furthermore, a warning that doesn't say where it came from or on whose
> > authority it is issued is just annoying. The existing README text would be better:
> >
> > This is a Subversion working copy administrative directory.
> > Visit http://subversion.tigris.org/ for more information.
> >
> >
> > > I think this warning is pointless. I'd be surprised is someone
> > > who is considering editing the entries files is going to be put off by
> > > a warning in the format file.
> >
> > Indeed.
> >
> > And why should we want such a message in the "format" file rather than, say,
> > the "entries" file? Do we have reason to expect people to find it there?
> >
> >
> > And what happened on the first "+" line in this diff hunk of the commit?
>
> Removal of a trailing space.
>
> But both maxb and djames had objections too. So, I guess I'll revert.
>
> Thanks for taking your time to review and comment.
I have to agree with Philip and Julian. Thanks for reverting, Erik.
--
Daniel Rall
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r17277 - in trunk/subversion: include libsvn_fs_base libsvn_repos libsvn_subr libsvn_wc
Posted by Erik Huelsmann <eh...@gmail.com>.
On 11/10/05, Julian Foad <ju...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> Philip Martin wrote:
> > dionisos@tigris.org writes:
> >
> >>Author: dionisos
> >>Date: Wed Nov 9 14:11:10 2005
> >>New Revision: 17277
> >
> >>--- trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_files.c (original)
> >>+++ trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_files.c Wed Nov 9 14:11:10 2005
>
> >>+svn_error_t *
> >>+svn_wc__adm_write_version_file (const char *adm_path, apr_pool_t *pool)
> >>+{
> >>+ return svn_io_write_version_file2
> >>+ (extend_with_adm_name (adm_path, NULL, FALSE, pool,
> >>+ SVN_WC__ADM_FORMAT, NULL),
> >>+ SVN_WC__VERSION,
> >>+ _(" DON'T EDIT FILES IN THIS AREA\n"
> >>+ " MANUAL CHANGES WILL BREAK YOUR WORKING COPY\n\n"),
> >>+ pool);
> >>+}
> >
> > "Will" is too strong, manual changes *may* break the working copy but
> > it's not inevitable.
>
> Furthermore, a warning that doesn't say where it came from or on whose
> authority it is issued is just annoying. The existing README text would be better:
>
> This is a Subversion working copy administrative directory.
> Visit http://subversion.tigris.org/ for more information.
>
>
> > I think this warning is pointless. I'd be surprised is someone
> > who is considering editing the entries files is going to be put off by
> > a warning in the format file.
>
> Indeed.
>
> And why should we want such a message in the "format" file rather than, say,
> the "entries" file? Do we have reason to expect people to find it there?
>
>
> And what happened on the first "+" line in this diff hunk of the commit?
Removal of a trailing space.
But both maxb and djames had objections too. So, I guess I'll revert.
Thanks for taking your time to review and comment.
bye,
Erik.
Re: svn commit: r17277 - in trunk/subversion: include libsvn_fs_base
libsvn_repos libsvn_subr libsvn_wc
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@btopenworld.com>.
Philip Martin wrote:
> dionisos@tigris.org writes:
>
>>Author: dionisos
>>Date: Wed Nov 9 14:11:10 2005
>>New Revision: 17277
>
>>--- trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_files.c (original)
>>+++ trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_files.c Wed Nov 9 14:11:10 2005
>>+svn_error_t *
>>+svn_wc__adm_write_version_file (const char *adm_path, apr_pool_t *pool)
>>+{
>>+ return svn_io_write_version_file2
>>+ (extend_with_adm_name (adm_path, NULL, FALSE, pool,
>>+ SVN_WC__ADM_FORMAT, NULL),
>>+ SVN_WC__VERSION,
>>+ _(" DON'T EDIT FILES IN THIS AREA\n"
>>+ " MANUAL CHANGES WILL BREAK YOUR WORKING COPY\n\n"),
>>+ pool);
>>+}
>
> "Will" is too strong, manual changes *may* break the working copy but
> it's not inevitable.
Furthermore, a warning that doesn't say where it came from or on whose
authority it is issued is just annoying. The existing README text would be better:
This is a Subversion working copy administrative directory.
Visit http://subversion.tigris.org/ for more information.
> I think this warning is pointless. I'd be surprised is someone
> who is considering editing the entries files is going to be put off by
> a warning in the format file.
Indeed.
And why should we want such a message in the "format" file rather than, say,
the "entries" file? Do we have reason to expect people to find it there?
And what happened on the first "+" line in this diff hunk of the commit?
> Index: subversion/include/svn_io.h
> ===================================================================
> --- subversion/include/svn_io.h (revision 17276)
> +++ subversion/include/svn_io.h (revision 17277)
> @@ -1021,10 +1021,23 @@
>
> /** Create (or overwrite) the file at @a path with new contents,
> * formatted as a non-negative integer @a version followed by a single
> - * newline. On successful completion the file will be read-only. Use
> + * newline. If @a comment is non-NULL, an aditional newline and On successful completion the file will be read-only. Use
> * @a pool for all allocations.
> + *
> + * @since New in 1.4
> + *
> */
> svn_error_t *
> +svn_io_write_version_file2 (const char *path, int version,
> + const char *comment, apr_pool_t *pool);
- Julian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org