• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Subversion wrappers (was: cvs 1.10 vs 1.11)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Subversion wrappers (was: cvs 1.10 vs 1.11)


  • Subject: Re: Subversion wrappers (was: cvs 1.10 vs 1.11)
  • From: j o a r <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 22:39:17 +0100


On Dec 29, 2006, at 9:39 PM, Sean McBride wrote:

To place an example where svn is inferior to cvs, I stuff documents
made with Pages.app into a svn repository to get version control.
Often, Pages liberately removes the .svn directory inside the
document bundle.

TextEdit does the same with .rtfd documents. Xcode and IB however seem
to be written more carefully, they do not blow away the .svn folder
within .xcodeproj and .nib files. Please do file (duplicate) bugs on
this issue!

I think that bundles are brilliant - and one of the great unique technologies of Mac OS X! The ability to use a regular directory to store various resources for an application, a framework, or like in this case a file. It's genius.


But I don't think it's clear cut what is the correct behaviour in this case. I think that an application that has defined its own bundled file format can consider the contents of that file package to be "private", and to expect that it (and possibly associated helpers like spotlight importers) is the only one who has the right to access its contents directly.

For apps like Xcode and IB it makes sense to be prepared to honour the presence of CVS or SVN files inside their file packages, but should this also be imposed as a requirement for bundled files in general? That you need to handle unknown stuff inside "your" file packages, and that you would have to know how to support / maintain these extra files / folders when updating your own file contents?

Consider the typical problematic case of an atomic write, where you create a new file, and replace the old file if the new file was created successfully. Should all applications that deals with bundled files be expected to not only manage their own file contents, but also bother with attempting to copy over other miscellaneous stuff from the old file before deleting it?

Perhaps this is all much easier than I make it out to be. I guess it can probably be fixed by implementing the proper support to the file management APIs in the high level frameworks (like NSFileWrapper)?

j o a r


_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden
References: 
 >cvs 1.10 vs 1.11 (From: Jeff Ray <email@hidden>)
 >Re: cvs 1.10 vs 1.11 (From: j o a r <email@hidden>)
 >Subversion wrappers (was: cvs 1.10 vs 1.11) (From: Markus Hitter <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Subversion wrappers (was: cvs 1.10 vs 1.11) (From: "Sean McBride" <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Subversion wrappers (was: cvs 1.10 vs 1.11)
  • Next by Date: Re: using chud.framework (again)
  • Previous by thread: Re: Subversion wrappers (was: cvs 1.10 vs 1.11)
  • Next by thread: using chud.framework (again)
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread