On 04/03/2013 03:43 PM, Bert Huijben wrote: > I don't think we really have a hybrid story for keyring, gnome, kde. We > store everything in there (and don't create a file with pointers). It is > just Windows where we use the two systems in one.
And I quote (from a file in my ~/.subversion/auth/svn.simple) {{{ K 8 passtype V 13 gnome-keyring K 15 svn:realmstring V 73 <https://recurrence.googlecode.com:443> Google Code Subversion Repository K 8 username V 18 cmpil...@gmail.com END }}} >> Personally, I'd like to remove this API before we ship 1.8 and rethink >> it in light of the work that I plan to revisit post-1.8 with the master >> passphrase feature. I'm certainly willing to do that (or some other >> more incrementally improving) work. But I'm not keen on simply >> jettisoning someone else's code, so I'm seeking feedback here. > > I used the current pattern of iterating and allowing to delete from the > callback to allow incremental improvements in future versions. This moves > some work to the client that uses this. (Common pattern would be iterate > to use list and then iterate again to delete items). I would say the > current api is easier to extend than the 1.0-1.7 'api' of just blowing > away the directory, which would also leave keyring, gnone and kde hanging > around. I'm not arguing that your programmatic approach isn't better than "blowing away the directory". I just don't want to get stuck with an API that pins us down. The more I think about the interfaces you've exposed -- ignoring the details of the implementation -- the more I believe they will be okay. There's still plenty of stuff that, IMO, must be fixed before 1.8.0, but I'll withdraw the suggesting to drop the API. I know TortoiseSVN (and others) want it. -- C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Enterprise Cloud Development
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature