On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:20, Philip Martin <philip.mar...@wandisco.com> wrote: > Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> writes: > >> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 16:43, Philip Martin <philip.mar...@wandisco.com> >> wrote: >>> Perhaps we should keep the error and toss the path? >> >> mod_dav_svn uses that path to construct a "nice" error message based >> on the context of the commit. > > mod_dav_svn isn't the only user of this API.
WELL aware of that fact. I was simply giving a data point for how the path was used. What's your point? >>> So currently reporting "conflict on path 'foo'" is probably sufficient >>> but it's odd to limit ourselves. We have an error reporting mechanism >>> why would we choose not to use it? >> >> Well... we return that conflict_path so that callers can make >> nicer/contextual error messages with the path. We don't transfer the >> whole chain over the wire, so if the path is on the inner error (say, >> if we just wrapped context and relied on the path to be in the inner >> error), then the user would never see the path. >> >> If we could/would marshal the whole error chain, then yes: we could >> rely on our error reporting mechanism. But we don't, so we can't. > > svnserve returns an error chain, see svn_ra_svn_write_cmd_failure. And other RA layers do not. -g
