On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Bert Huijben <b...@qqmail.nl> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Johan Corveleyn [mailto:jcor...@gmail.com] ... >> Note that a failure to access a file / directory does *not* give this >> problem. This incomplete xml only happens when there is a problem >> accessing the *server* ("nonexistent" in my example). > > Did you really try all error conditions of 'svn status --xml' without '-u' ? > :)
No, of course not :-). I just gave an example where the output was broken (host not found), as opposed to another error condition (server reponds "URL 'X' non-existent in revision Y") where the xml response is still valid. Ignoring implementation (which I always do when I'm arguing about behavior), this seems quite weird to me. I think it's reasonable to expect some consistency here, and preferably "consistently *valid* output" :-). It's especially weird in this case, because: - Broken case: svn client knows *immediately* that something is wrong. We're asking it to consult a URL, but it can't even contact the server. Why does it even start to open an xml <info> element? - Correct case: agreed, this is much more difficult, because svn is already talking to the server (and possibly streaming output to the user), and only finds out partway through that some targets don't exist on the server (I think that's what happens anyway). But still, svn gives valid xml output, yay! -- Johan
