On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 7:17 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@xbc.nu> wrote: > On 30.07.2010 13:57, C. Michael Pilato wrote: >> On 07/30/2010 03:55 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: >> >>> That approach just doesn't sound right to me. I've always understood >>> that a temporary redirect implies that requests should always try the >>> original first. Since there's no concept of a session in HTTP, you can't >>> really assume anything about how long a redirect is valid -- it may be >>> only for one single request and not for others. >>> >> What do you think Subversion should do when it encounters a temporary >> redirect, then? >> > Follow the redirect but not record the new URL in the working copy metadata.
Not being that familiar with the HTTP spec, this would be my gut instinct as well. I see the analog with a typical web browser here. When a browser gets a temporary redirect, it redirects, but usually tries the original location the next time. For a permanent redirect, a browser will often cache that information and go straight to the new location. It feels like that's what we should be doing here. -Hyrum (who doesn't envy Mike's position of being at the receiving end of "design by committee")
