On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 06:19, Julian Foad <julian.f...@wandisco.com> wrote: >... > I haven't thought through how this would affect the future of the > 'svn:special' property. Were there any plans to make 'svn:special' > describe special files other than symlinks (devices, pipes, etc.)?
Somebody may have thought about that in the past, and they should be tarred and feathered. svn:special is an awful hack :-( Look at it this way: we should have a symlink kind (in svn_kind_t) as a first-order value, and then we separately worry about how to marshal that kind around and/or represent it within our classic/backwards-compat system (read: svn:special). Our current interfaces should be talking about symlinks. Under the covers, we do "funny stuff" for that kind of node. >... Cheers, -g
