On 11/24/2010 01:12 PM, Julian Foad wrote: >> C. Michael Pilato wrote on Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 10:36:31 -0500: >>> On 11/24/2010 05:41 AM, Julian Foad wrote: >>>> Sometimes the summary prints the abspath instead of the relpath >>>> specified on the command line. Specifically, this happens if you >>>> specify a changelist. > > C-Mike wrote: >> r1038650 > > Thanks, that looks good. > > Daniel Shahaf wrote: >> Another case (with current HEAD, i.e., after the changelist patch): >> >> % $svn up ../t2 >> Updating '/home/daniel/src/svn/t2' ... >> ^C > > That's a slightly different issue, the handling of "..". A more > comprehensive transcript: > > $ svn up ../readme.txt ../subversion-b > Skipped '../readme.txt' > Updating '/home/julianfoad/src/subversion-b' ... > G /home/julianfoad/src/subversion-b/subversion/libsvn_subr/dirent_uri.c > Updated to revision 1038733. > Summary of updates: > Updated '../subversion-b' to r1038733. > Summary of conflicts: > Skipped paths: 1
So, I have a pair of questions:
1. Given the option of displaying either "../subversion-b" or
"/home/julianfoad/src/subversion-b", which is preferred? NOTE that we
probably do *not* reasonably have that choice because at some point
we'll have converted into an abspath internally, and IMO it just isn't
worth it to pass around both an original path-as-the-user-specified-it
and the normalized abspath. (I believe we should use relative paths
when the targets are in or under ${CWD}, absolute paths otherwise, which
is the typical behavior of the command-line client notification code.)
2. Should "Skipped" items follow suit? (I say, "yes").
--
C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
