You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Branko Čibej <br...@xbc.nu> on 2003/04/29 05:27:35 UTC
Re: svn commit: rev 5754 - in trunk: . subversion/include subversion/libsvn_ra
subversion/libsvn_ra_svn subversion/libsvn_subr subversion/svnserve
ghudson@tigris.org wrote:
>Change how tunnel agents are specified. Instead of specifying them by
>hostname in ~/.subversion/servers, you now specify them abstractly in
>the URL with "svn+scheme://hostname/path". By default, the only
>defined scheme is "ssh", which runs the command $SVN_SSH if it is
>define or "ssh" if not.
>
>
Wouldn't it be better if we just used the config instead of an
environment variable? So, the "ssh" scheme would run ssh by default, or
whatever is defined in the config file. That would work out of the box
99% of the time.
(Re environment variables: I'd get rid of $SVN_EDITOR, too, now that the
user can specify it in the config file. Using $EDITOR and $VISUAL is
O.K. (on Unix), because those are standard variables; making up our own
isn't that good, though.)
--
Brane Čibej <br...@xbc.nu> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: rev 5754 - in trunk: . subversion/include subversion/libsvn_ra
subversion/libsvn_ra_svn subversion/libsvn_subr subversion/svnserve
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@xbc.nu>.
Greg Hudson wrote:
>On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 01:27, Branko Čibej wrote:
>
>
>>Wouldn't it be better if we just used the config instead of an
>>environment variable? So, the "ssh" scheme would run ssh by default, or
>>whatever is defined in the config file. That would work out of the box
>>99% of the time.
>>
>>
>
>epg specifically wanted support for an environment variable, and it
>seemed like reasonably functionality to me. There are situations where
>it's more convenient to use one--for instance, a script, you could
>conceivably want to run "SVN_SSH=something svn import blah". And
>there's also precedent in CVS.
>
There are lots of precedents in CVS, including the one about directories
not being versioned. :-)
>Why do you find environment variables evil?
>
>
They're not evil; but I prefer to avoid controlling program behaviour
with environment variables, unless there's a very good reason. It makes
debugging more complicated, and the probability of collisions with other
programs is greater with environment variables than with config files.
In this case it would IMHO be better to introduce a mechanism to
override config file options on the command line.
--
Brane Čibej <br...@xbc.nu> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: rev 5754 - in trunk: . subversion/include
subversion/libsvn_ra subversion/libsvn_ra_svn subversion/libsvn_subr
subversion/svnserve
Posted by Greg Hudson <gh...@MIT.EDU>.
On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 01:27, Branko Čibej wrote:
> Wouldn't it be better if we just used the config instead of an
> environment variable? So, the "ssh" scheme would run ssh by default, or
> whatever is defined in the config file. That would work out of the box
> 99% of the time.
epg specifically wanted support for an environment variable, and it
seemed like reasonably functionality to me. There are situations where
it's more convenient to use one--for instance, a script, you could
conceivably want to run "SVN_SSH=something svn import blah". And
there's also precedent in CVS.
Why do you find environment variables evil?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org