On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 10:40:41AM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote: >> Guess I just do not see big benefit from using the existing property. >> I am not vetoing the idea or anything, just do not see the big >> improvement and the parsing/merging sounds complicated. > > I agree. Changing the way svn:ignore works introduces a risk > of regressions without much benefit.
It probably goes without saying, but I'm with Mark and Stefan on this. I don't see any advantage to piggybacking new inheritable ignore behavior on the existing svn:ignore property. As for the property names, after much discussion on IRC (http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/svn-dev?date=2012-11-01#l185) it appears we are in agreement on these changes: "svn:inheritable-auto-props" --> "svn:auto-props". "svn:inheritable-ignores" --> "svn:global-ignores" (Yes, the "global" in svn:global-ignores is only "global" to the subtree on which the property is set, but we want to differentiate between the old "svn:ignore" property and as Stefan pointed out in IRC, we just need to pick a name, document the behavior and go with it) -- Paul T. Burba CollabNet, Inc. -- www.collab.net -- Enterprise Cloud Development Skype: ptburba
