Sounds, then, like you're asking not for extending the set of valid propnames but for enforcing the existing conventions?
Have a look at svn_repos__validate_prop() --- that's the function that implements server-side validation of properties. Do you want to just call svn_prop_name_is_valid() from there? There are some standard caveats associated with updating this function, which I've just added to its docstring. Garret Wilson wrote on Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:08:26 -0800: > On 1/23/2012 11:50 AM, Philip Martin wrote: > >... The situation is that the low level svn_fs.h API allows > >property names to be any null-terminated C string. The > >intermediate svn_ra.h API imposes restrictions because only XML > >names can be marshalled over http:, I think svn: allows anything. > >The high level svn_client.h API restricts names to a subset of > >ASCII and thus avoids passing anything the RA layers cannot > >handle. You want to relax the svn_client.h API to allow XML names. > >Strictly speaking I suppose a 3rd party RA implementation might > >only support the svn_client.h subset, but I don't know of any > >other RA implementations. > > Although I want to relax the restrictions for my own personal > reasons (i.e. to make my code work over JavaHL with repositories > with which my code has worked for years over SVN+DAV), what is even > more important to me is consistency. It makes no sense to me if a > client has different naming rules based upon the method of access to > a repository. > > So if I'm voted down (I'm just speaking proverbially here---I don't > even know if I would have "voting rights") on lifting the > restrictions, I would want to /impose/ restrictions on svn: and > http:. Everyone should play by the same rules. If the same rules > would have been in place from the beginning, I wouldn't even /be/ in > the situation I am now, because at least SVN+DAV would have rejected > the property names I was using. I had no idea they would stop > working once I moved to accessing my repository locally using > JavaHL-based clients. > > So yeah, I want to relax the svn_client.h API on what makes a valid > property name. But even more than that, I want consistency across > all clients. And even more than that, I want a specification that > says what the rules are... > > Anyway, I don't want to risk over-arguing this. It should be plain > what I'm asking at this point---someone just let me know if my > request will be granted. > > Cheers, > > Garret
