Paul Burba wrote on Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 16:55:48 -0500: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:57 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> > wrote: > > I must have blanked out through the sequence of emails that got us from > > "let's solve a couple of oft-reported user issues regarding auto-props and > > ignores" to "let's implement custom inherited properties". But in general, > > I'm with Ivan here. > > > > Subversion's behavior is unaffected by user-defined properties, so we have > > zero obligation to implement any sort of advanced handling APIs that may or > > may not ever be used in conjunction with those properties. > > I'm not proposing anything like that... > > > We need to > > provide a way to set properties; we need to provide a way to get them (as > > efficiently as possible). > > Agreed. Just the basics, that is all I am suggesting. > > > The users can then do whatever they want with the > > results, choosing to interpret their own custom properties as inheritable or > > not based on criteria that is likewise custom > > Ah, here is where I suspect we have a disconnect. You say users can > choose "to interpret their own custom properties as inheritable". > This seemingly implies that there is no real difference between > "normal" user properties and "inheritable" user properties; it's all > in how we chose to interpret them. Is this what you are saying? > > Because if it is, I think this is a mistake, as I've explained > elsethread. I'll take another stab at explaining my objection: > > [It should be possible to read inheritable properties, but not other > properties, from the repository root even without read access to it.] > > Make sense? >
Why can't the admin simply set the property on every project root? Just like we, redundantly, set svn:ignore to the same value on all subversion/tests/libsvn_*/ directories. Daniel P.S. Sorry if my []-summarizing of your email is inaccurate.
