C. Michael Pilato wrote on Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 10:33:37 -0500: > On 11/25/2010 05:07 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > C. Michael Pilato wrote on Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 13:42:09 -0500: > >> when the targets are in or under ${CWD}, absolute paths otherwise, > >> which > >> is the typical behavior of the command-line client notification code.) > > > > But what if the user specified a target, which is under `pwd`, using an > > absolute path? Do we want to notify this using an absolute path or > > a relative path? > > > > If we go with "make it absolute whenever it's outside cwd", then I think > > that (as you suggest, but not necessarily as it works right now) it > > makes sense to also do the opposite --- convert abspath to cwd-relative > > path if they happen to be under cwd. > > I agree. I (think) I've done this in r1039072. >
Thanks for this :-). It works as expected when the current directory is entered by its name, but not when it's entered through a symlink: [[[ % cd /tmp % ln -s wc1 wcalias % cd wc1 % $svn up /tmp/wc1/trunk/iota Updating 'trunk/iota' ... % cd /tmp/wcalias % $svn up /tmp/wc1/trunk/iota11D Updating 'trunk/iota' ... % $svn up /tmp/wcalias/trunk/iota Updating '/tmp/wcalias/trunk/iota' ... ]]] Ideally, the last output would have used the relative path 'trunk/iota', too. However, I'm not sure how to easily solve that --- is it as easy as calling some "resolve symlinks" function on the absolute-cwd string? > >> 2. Should "Skipped" items follow suit? (I say, "yes"). > > > > +1 > > I did *not* do this yet. Right now, we get a mix of absolute and relative > paths passed through the notification system by client layer. I'm not > convinced (at all!) that this "mix" has been well-thought-out. I suspect > it's just in whatever state naturally evolved from our internal conversion > to abspaths everywhere. > I'm wondering what would happen -- that is, how > much chaos would ensue -- if we changed subversion/svn/notify.c:notify() to, > in the case where n->path is not a URL, always first convert n->path to an > absolute path before doing the prefix removal stuff. > What chaos could ensure? Just N+1 test expectations, or something more? > -- > C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> > CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand