Stefan Sperling wrote on Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 14:06:38 +0100: > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:53:18PM +0400, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > > Names used in internal API is not important for me. > > I think it's important to have some consistency in the naming schemes > used for internal and externals interfaces. The APIs are public APIs > which we provide to our users just like we provide the command line > interface. > > We also currently expect users to remove cached credentials from the > '.subversion/auth' directory, so the term 'auth' is already familiar: > http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.serverconfig.netmodel.html#svn.serverconfig.netmodel.credcache > I've never seen users being confused by this terminology. > > > I worry about > > possible user confusion that 'svn auth' subcommand is > > responsible/required to perform authentication itself. > > Yes, I see that problem, too. This is why I thought about alternatives > such as 'svn authcreds', 'svn authinfo', 'svn authcache'. I don't see > a clear advantage of using 'svn creds' instead of any of the other names. > > Also note that the help text mentions 'credentials' for this reason: > auth: Manage cached authentication credentials.
Perhaps 'svn credentials' would work better?
