Re: ok to extend svn:externals syntax? -- was: Re: AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

Neels J Hofmeyr wrote on Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 21:34:30 +0100: > It was suggested to extend the svn:externals syntax, adding a flag > that marks externals that should behave differently. By now this > seems to me to be the best way out. What would that look like? > >[-rN] [-c] @P > >-c =

Re: ok to extend svn:externals syntax? -- was: Re: AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 09:34:30PM +0100, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: > It was suggested to extend the svn:externals syntax, adding a flag > that marks externals that should behave differently. By now this > seems to me to be the best way out. What would that look like? > >[-rN] [-c] @P > >-c

Re: ok to extend svn:externals syntax? -- was: Re: AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: > I think there is general agreement (to the degree of common > sense?) that file and dir externals should behave the same > way. +1 to that. > I would be fine with keeping current trunk: it changes file > externals' default behavior, so that they are treated like > dir ext

Re: AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 4:40 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote: > On 11/10/2011 10:29 AM, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: >> It seems to me that excluding only those externals (dir & file) that are >> fixed to a specific revision is the best solution. My only worry are all >> those users out there expecting dir

Re: Fwd: Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 10.11.2011 16:21, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: On 11/07/2011 07:14 PM, Miha Vitorovic wrote: On 7.11.2011 16:08, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: Can you argue up a case where one would want a non-revision-pegged external excluded from commit? I'm reluctant to take simply previous externals behavior as arg

Re: ok to extend svn:externals syntax? -- was: Re: AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/10/2011 09:39 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote: The next change we make to the externals syntax needs to be to add an explicit "#format = 3" header to it so we can stop trying to deduce the format the user intended! now that's cumbersome. a footer would be much nicer. ;) ~Neels

Re: ok to extend svn:externals syntax? -- was: Re: AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/10/2011 03:34 PM, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: > It was suggested to extend the svn:externals syntax, adding a flag that > marks externals that should behave differently. By now this seems to me to > be the best way out. What would that look like? The next change we make to the externals syntax ne

ok to extend svn:externals syntax? -- was: Re: AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/10/2011 07:10 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote: As a community, we need to decide how we will handle file externals in general. Their clever implementation invites inconsistency. I think there is general agreement (to the degree of common sense?) that file and dir externals should behave the

Re: AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/10/2011 11:15 AM, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: > On 11/10/2011 04:40 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote: >> On 11/10/2011 10:29 AM, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: >>> It seems to me that excluding only those externals (dir& file) that are >>> fixed to a specific revision is the best solution. My only worry are a

Re: AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/10/2011 04:40 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote: On 11/10/2011 10:29 AM, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: It seems to me that excluding only those externals (dir& file) that are fixed to a specific revision is the best solution. My only worry are all those users out there expecting dir externals to be ex

Re: AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/10/2011 10:29 AM, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: > It seems to me that excluding only those externals (dir & file) that are > fixed to a specific revision is the best solution. My only worry are all > those users out there expecting dir externals to be excluded always. > > That's why I'm asking: if

Re: AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/08/2011 08:55 AM, Markus Schaber wrote: Hi, Von: Miha Vitorovic [mailto:miha.vitoro...@gmail.com] On 7.11.2011 16:08, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: Can you argue up a case where one would want a non-revision-pegged external excluded from commit? I'm reluctant to take simply previous externals

AW: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

Hi, Von: Miha Vitorovic [mailto:miha.vitoro...@gmail.com] > >On 7.11.2011 16:08, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: >> Can you argue up a case where one would want a non-revision-pegged >> external excluded from commit? I'm reluctant to take simply previous >> externals behavior as argument, because extern

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/07/2011 07:14 PM, Miha Vitorovic wrote: > > On 7.11.2011 16:08, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: >> Can you argue up a case where one would want a non-revision-pegged external >> excluded from commit? I'm reluctant to take simply previous externals >> behavior as argument, because externals have alway

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 7.11.2011 16:08, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: Can you argue up a case where one would want a non-revision-pegged external excluded from commit? I'm reluctant to take simply previous externals behavior as argument, because externals have always sucked so far. I can :) I spend my days writing "code

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/05/2011 10:42 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: >> So, yeah, maybe we should make UC2 the default and provide an >> --exclude-externals option. Anyone who's asking how to get a default of not >> committing dir externals along can simply be told: revision peg them. > > I don't think changing the cur

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/05/2011 05:42 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > I don't think changing the current default behaviour is a good idea. > Changing the default behaviour is more likely to break existing > scripts than a new configuration option. Agreed. > Also, please do not get too side-tracked because of the disc

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 12:48:09AM +0100, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: > Not having the option of choosing a default, I'm rethinking which behavior > should be the default. I think both are valid use cases: > > UC1) Prevent accidental commits to stuff coming from different areas, so > exclude externals

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/04/2011 12:22 PM, Julian Foad wrote: > Hi Neels. Brief response. ...yet a first class review, thanks a lot Julian! > Looks like a good improvement. > > svn_wc__committable_external_info_t: Use the new 'svn_kind_t' instead of > svn_node_kind_t. doh! > svn_client_commit6(): Could you ext

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/04/2011 01:29 PM, Bert Huijben wrote: >> From: C. Michael Pilato [mailto:cmpil...@collab.net] > +0 on including the support to allow the commits. (I haven't reviewed the > patch in detail yet, but the idea is good) > > -0 to -0.5 on making it configurable as default behavior. > > As projec

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/04/2011 09:13 AM, Mark Phippard wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 9:09 AM, C. Michael Pilato > wrote: > > On 11/04/2011 08:36 AM, Mark Phippard wrote: > > I can comment from a GUI tool perspective. In Subclipse, we have > always had > > this featur

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 9:09 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote: > On 11/04/2011 08:36 AM, Mark Phippard wrote: > > I can comment from a GUI tool perspective. In Subclipse, we have always > had > > this feature. > > [...] > > > FWIW, I think that the command line client should have always included > > ex

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/04/2011 08:36 AM, Mark Phippard wrote: > I can comment from a GUI tool perspective. In Subclipse, we have always had > this feature. [...] > FWIW, I think that the command line client should have always included > externals by default. I guess we cannot do that now, so having an option is

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: > I've rinsed and improved my proposed feature dubbed > svn commit --include-externals > (Related issues: #1167, #3563) > > I hope this will cut a much clearer path through the jungle that is > externals behavior. Now I'm hoping for some rev

RE: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

> -Original Message- > From: C. Michael Pilato [mailto:cmpil...@collab.net] > Sent: vrijdag 4 november 2011 12:31 > To: Neels J Hofmeyr > Cc: Alexey Neyman; dev@subversion.apache.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2) > > On 11/04/2011 06:55 A

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

"C. Michael Pilato" writes: > On 11/04/2011 06:55 AM, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: >> Right now my focus is still on the "inner" behavior and so far it seems most >> other devs have different things on their mind. I'm still gauging whether it >> is permissive or dismissive silence, +0 or -0 ;) > > +0 f

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/04/2011 06:55 AM, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: > Right now my focus is still on the "inner" behavior and so far it seems most > other devs have different things on their mind. I'm still gauging whether it > is permissive or dismissive silence, +0 or -0 ;) +0 from me. :-) -- C. Michael Pilato C

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

depth=immediates skipping dir externals, that you documented inside the function. svn_wc__committable_externals_below(): Document the 'immediates_only' parameter. - Julian --- On Thu, 3/11/11, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: > From: Neels J Hofmeyr > Subject: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2) > To: "Sub

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

On 11/04/2011 05:47 AM, Alexey Neyman wrote: > Neels, > > Question from a user standpoint: would it be possible to request this > behavior > as default via some config file option? Yes, probably, as soon as we implement it, which I think we should do when the time comes (as in $HOME/.subversion

Re: [PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

Neels, Question from a user standpoint: would it be possible to request this behavior as default via some config file option? Regards, Alexey. On Thursday, November 03, 2011 06:33:56 am Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: > I've rinsed and improved my proposed feature dubbed > svn commit --include-externa

[PATCH] commit --include-externals (v2)

I've rinsed and improved my proposed feature dubbed svn commit --include-externals (Related issues: #1167, #3563) I hope this will cut a much clearer path through the jungle that is externals behavior. Now I'm hoping for some reviews! The idea is to have file and dir externals behave the same w